Sketch of paleobotany

PRESIDENT WHITE LIBRARY,
CORNELL UNIVERSITY.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR—U. 8; GROLOGICAL SURVEY
J. W. POWELL,’ DIRECTOR

‘SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

LESTER F. WARD

-

ete ; : , : :
|EXTRACT FROM THE FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR, 1883-84.)

| “WASHINGTON
. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE -

be 1885.

oe

Cornell University

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032185914

SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

BY

LESTER F. WARD.

A 964.

wel UNIVER,
cor The

President White
. 2 Library
“ervey ©

CONTENTS.

Page
I.—On the term ‘‘Paleobotany” ... 2... 0.0.2.0. 220 cence eee eee e eee ten ees 363
I1.—Interrelations of geology and biology ......... --.-.--e eee eee eee eee ees 363
III.—Scope of the present paper -..............--0. eee ine weiee Bewese 364
IV.—Need of o condensed exhibit. .-. 2.2... 0.2. cece ee cence eee cee eee cote 364
V.—Future prospects of paleobotany .......... 022. .-00ee cee e ee cence cee eee 365
VI.—Interdependence'of botany and paleobotany ........--.-.----. 2... +--- 366
VII.—Historical review of paleobotanical discovery ...-.....---------++-++-+ 368
A.—Biographical sketches......-.... 022-22 see-ee cece eee cee eee eee 368
T. Scheu hzerewwcceus cee wh shoesewudd sae emese eee seawes 370
2. Schlotheimiecsiaycouses cs cond cee ccd ceeececeeees eeaet 370

Sy Stern bere cece ies des wee ces we atMaweead etka dense 371
4, (BION OMaltie-socossacc cece Geese seicceeececciaa See ceeeiee e's 372
Os Witla. jccccss exes scacekkiee toddgeee tneee ne eeeed 372
6: (GOpperb accede cctewdes ceeeeee seks coetamee Sedenm ee 373
Me CORAM es scben oto emer eons Soke weedy cer abetes Bee ceet 374

8) Geinlty scecvemmdaceeweesexenesso weeet weeeme Rees Bee see xe 374

9. Binney csvemeesaecveher se cece: secnidceeewewessetadee 374
10) Un @eriecs: 2 ossce egened cele ven ssneuiaeeeneeee eee cece 375
I -Schim per ys ciece wes xian isl 'd oy weeeineeeemeeeets - eESe eee 375

12. Williamson sccccvccns cesses cose wedaaseeeseees cere cece 376

13; AbesquerenX\s#<2. 2 scslonccs gotnctstenreetencesesedsas | Sd6
143 Dawsoiegscgesex cers st cimiee seiesecwiasesesci weeses eee Oe

15, Heer ceases cies bs soy, be Sach aeacee sseieece weet ee eeciisle 378

16; Bunburyics eceste 2262 sealeeeorseeceeses seas st eee cess: OTD

17. Massalongo....--.- 3p biereiat wate eine serdar histets ie eat g'oeiee’s 379

18. Ettingshausen sss ses ssn cesectesieasiess! Se eeiep- ee estes 380

19: Newberty 2: = ses2¢-.2icarscenediahiess pita weenie “OBI

20, Schenk: < cjais ssen. eeeoveculwuiincs wed fsa keene 382

Q1.. Saporta ces cee ou snk vane ves seriece teenie see 383

22. Carruthers) o.sucsceic cece x sateecreren cree Gece teint 384
B.—Sketch of the early history and subsequent progress of paleo-

hObaN Yer. d cies sie cen Ses twa meee Sees Gemte hedd wee ce eae euied 385

1. The pre-scientific period ...--..----. --- eee eee eee eee 385

2. The scientific period .......----. 2-2-2. 2-2 eee ee eee 399

VIII.—Nomenclature and classification of fossil plants....-.....---..-----+.-- 425

1X.—The natural method as indicated by paleobotany.........-.--..----.-- 431

1. Types of vegetation. ...... 0... 2-2-2 cece ee coe eee eee eee eee 432

2) “The LinnwaniSy stem coset eteeietieinetce ties hese oe cieceemis 433

3. Systems of the Jussieus .....-. ..---- cece cee e eee ee eee eee eee 434

4, System of modern botanists .... .-..-..----..----- 2+ --- 2 eee eee 435

5. Modified system proposed ....-..---.--------------+-- eee wesea 436

6. Classification of the cryptogams ....-.. 2.222. 222. eee eee eee eee 437

7. Geognostico-botanical view of the plant life of the globe ...-..- 439

359

ILLUSTRATIONS.

PLaTE LVI.—Diagram No. 1; showing the relative predominence of each prin-
cipal type of vegetation at each geological period (colored)... 443
LVIIL.—Diagram No. 2, showing the observed origin and development

of the principal types of vegetation in geologic time .......- 450
LVIII.—Diagram No. 3, showing the assumed origin and develonment
of the principal types of vegetation in geologic time ..-...-. 452

SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.'

By LESTER F,. WARD.

I.—ON THE TERM “ PALEOBOTANY.”

The term paleobotany has the advantage of brevity over the more
common expressions vegetable paleontology and phytopaleontology, while
at the same time its etymologic derivation from two purely Greek words
renders it equally legitimate. Still, neither of the other terms should
be entirely discarded. While it is always necessary to use the specific
term for the science of fossil plants, the practice of employing the ge-
neric term paleontology when treating of animal remains only seems ob-
jectionable. The corresponding term paleozodlogy should be recognized,
and used whenever the more restricted expressions vertebrate paleon-
tology and invertebrate paleontology are inapplicable. It is thus only
that the terminology of the science becomes consistent and itself sci-
entific.

IL—INTERRELATIONS OF GEOLOGY AND BIOLOGY.

The science of paleontology has two objects, the one geologic, the
other biologic. The history of the earth is toa large extent the history
of its life, and the record which organic life leaves constitutes the prin-
cipal index to the age of its successive strata. In paleozodlogy this
record is implicitly relied upon and forms the solid foundation of geo-
logical science. In paleobotany so much cannot be said, yet it too has
already rendered valuable service to geology, and is often the only guide
furnished by nature to the solution of important problems.

The contribution that paleontology thus makes to the history of the
earth—to geology—is not more interesting than that which it makes to
the history of the earth’s life—to biology. No questions are more en-
grossing, nor in fact more practically important for man as one of the
living forms developed on the earth, than those that pertain to the origin
and development of the various forms of life, and a knowledge of the
past life of the globe is that by which we are enabled to understand its

1 Being a preliminary draft of a portion of the introduction to a ‘Compendium of

Paleobotany,” in preparation.
yy prep 369

364 SKETCH OF PALEUBOTANY.

present life as a product of development. Paleozodlogy has already
thrown a flood of light upon the true nature of animal life as it now ex-
ists, and now paleobotany is rapidly coming to the aid of those who have
hitherto so long groped in darkness relative to the origin, development,
and distribution of the plant life of the globe.

III.—_SCOPE OF THE PRESENT PAPER.

With the second of these objects the present work is only incident-
ally concerned, its chief aim being to secure, so far as its influence ex-
tends, the better realization of the first. Still, it cannot be denied that
a considerable degree of mutual dependence subsists between the bio-
logic and the geologic standpoints. To understand the true force of the
facts of paleobotany as arguments for geology it is essential that their
full biologic significance be grasped. It has therefore been deemed
proper, in this introduction to the several tabular and systematic state-
ments which will make up the bulk of the volume and bear chiefly upon
the geological aspect of the subject, to consider certain of the more im-
portant biologic questions, in addition to the specially geologic ones,
and to discuss, from an historical and developmental standpoint, some
of the leading problems of modern phytology.

IV.—NEED OF A CONDENSED EXHIBIT.

First of all it must be insisted upon that, notwithstanding the large
amount of work that has been done in paleobotany and the somewhat
formidable literature which it possesses, the present state of the science
is far from satisfactory when regarded as a guide to the attainment of
either of the ends above mentioned. Its value, as compared with that
of paleozodlogy, in the determination of ‘the age of formations in which
vegetable remains are discovered is very small, yet it may well be asked
whether the habit of discounting the testimony of fossil plants, acquired
at a time when much less was known than now, may not have been con-
tinued to an extent which is no longer warranted by the present state
of our knowledge. Whether this be so or not, it is at least certain that
the real present insufficiency of this department of paleontology as an
exact and reliable index to geologic succession is largely due to the ex-
ceedingly fragmentary and desultory character of the science, consid-
ered as a body of truth, and that a proper and careful collation and sys-
temization of the facts already in the possession of science will add in
a high degree to their value in this respect. It was this consideration,
so obvious to me from the beginning of my investigations in paleobot-
any, that moved me to undertake the compilation of this work, and it

WARD.] PRELIMINARY REMARKS. 365

has been the growing importance of this same consideration, becoming
more apparent at every step, that has impelled and encouraged me
throughout its laborious preparation.

It is especially in America that this want of methodical arrange-
ment in paleobotany has been most keenly felt. The most important
works on fossil plants have been published since the last attempt of
this kind was made in Europe, and very little of our knowledge of the
science has ever been embodied in any of the works of this class. The
literature of this country is scattered throughout the scientific serials
and official publications of the various geological surveys, and the few
more comprehensive works that have appeared not only leave this branch
of the subject in great doubt and confusion, but contain, besides, many
fundamental misconceptions and positive errors.

Whatever degree of inadequacy paleobotany may reveal for the solu-
tion of geologic questions, no one can deny that its value can never
be fairly judged until its materials are first so classified and arranged
that all the light that can be shed by them on any given problem can be
directed full upon it and the problem deliberately studied byit. When
this can be accomplished, even should it do no more than emphasize
the insufficiency of the data, it would, even then, have the effect of
pointing out the proper direction of future research with a view to in-
creasing the material and perfecting the data. This work has been
conceived and is being conducted primarily to this end of thus focaliz-
ing, as it were, the knowledge already extant in this department of re-
search, and of bringing it to bear with its full force, however feeble
this may be, upon the questions to whose solution it is capable of being
legitimately applied.

V.—FUTURE PROSPECTS OF PALEOBOTANY,

While it is particularly as a contribution to American science, and
with special reference to its application to American geology that the
work has been undertaken, still, for many and obvious reasons it was
found impossible to confine it to purely American facts. The useful-
ness, for the purpose intended, of any such compilation increases in an
accelerated ratio as its scope is expanded, and its value only begins to
be really great when it approaches complete universality and compasses
the whole field of facts so far as known within its particular department.
While this would be true of any science, it is conspicuously so of paleo-
botany, where, more than anywhere else, the record is so notably incom-
plete, A more spécial reason in this case lies in the fact, only recently
so strongly felt by paleobotanists, that the floras of the successive epochs
in the history of the earth have been differentiating and becoming more
and more varied according to their degree of territorial separation, so
that in studying them in reverse order we find greater and greater uni-

366 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

formity over the whole globe as we go back in time. The fact that
even the Tertiary floras of the most remote regions of the world possess
a striking resemblance among one another, wholly unknown among ex-
isting floras, has only just now fairly revealed itself to science, and found
its striking confirmation in the very recent work? of Baron von Et-
tingshausen on the Tertiary Flora of Australia. This uniform char-
acter of the fossil floras of different epochs, combined with their varia-
tion from one epoch to another, lends hope to paleobotany and leads to
the belief that when we shall have learned with precision the true char-
acteristics of each flora—learned to distinguish the accidental from the
essential, and geographic from chronologic characteristics—we shall be
in a condition to apply the data at hand to the explanation and eluci-
dation of the geologic and biologic history of the earth.

While it is upon the defectiveness of the geologic record, so far as
plants help to make it, that the chief stress is usually laid, still, could
this record be so edited that it could be made to convey its full mean-
ing it would probably be found that it is really more complete than
the biologic record; in other words, the knowledge we have of fossil
plants would go further in explaining geologic succession and deter-
mining questions of age than it can be made to do in explaining the
mode of development, distribution, and differentiation of plant forms
on theearth’s suface. On the subject of geographical distribution, with
which are inevitably bound up many questions of origin, variation, and
descent, much has already been written. De Candolle. Hooker, Gray,
Grisebach, Ettingshausen, Heer, and Engler have at different times and
iu numerous ways succeeded in building up a body of valuable literature
relating to phytogeography. Since, however, this concerns itself prin-
cipally with explaining the origin of existing floras, chiefly dicotyledon-
ous, it cannot reach back to the primary and doubtless ever insoluble
problems of the differentiation of the great types of vegetation that have
successively dominated the plant life of the globe through past geologic.
ages. Yet, however hopeless the task when the idea of complete solu-
tion is considered, it is nevertheless these very questions which are con-
stantly pressing upon the thoughtful student, and he cannot suppress
them if he will, or cease to recognize that they are legitimate, and that
every, even the least, approach towards their solution is so much clear
gain to science. q

VI.—INTERDEPENDENCE OF BOTANY AND PALEOBOT-
ANY.

It is only quite recently that botanists have begun to turn their atten-
tion to questions of this kind. The overthrow of the doctrine of fixity
ef species opened the door to such considerations, rendering them legiti-

*Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Tertiirflora Australiens. Von C. von Ettingshausen.
Denksehr. d. k. k. Akad. d. Wissensch., Bd. XLVII, Wien, 1883.

WARD. ] PRELIMINARY REMARKS, 367

mate, and the doctrine of the descent of all plant forms from remote
ancestors more or less unlike them may now be said to prevail, although
few and feeble have been the attempts to indicate the character of the
genetic relationships existing among living types. This general sub-
ject will be treated later, but it is mentioned here merely to show how it
has naturally come about that botanists are now turning their attention
towards paleontology as the only source that holds out any promise to
them of even partial success in explaining the development of existing
floras. The effect of this can but be salutary, and paleobotany is likely
to gain as much as botany proper. Even should no success be attained
in the direction sought both sciences will gain, since it will bring them
into more intimate relations and tend to blend them, as is natural, iuto
ore science. Hitherto, it must be confessed, they have been studied
too independently. In fact, not only have botanists as a rule ignored
the existence of paleontology, but paleobotanists have generally gone
on with their botanical classifications and discussions in total disregard
of the elaborate systems of the former. Without comparing the results
thus independently arrived at, it is safe to pronounce this entire
method unwise and improper. To harmonize these results after so
long a course of divergence will be a difficult task, and in the effort which
is here made in this direction complete success is neither claimed nor
hoped for. But if the existing vegetation of the globe has descended
from its past vegetation, as almost every botanist as weli as paleontolo-
gist now assumes, what reason can exist for having two sets of classifica-
tion? The botanist is thus dependent upon paleontology for all his
knowledge of vegetal development and should listen closely to the voice
of the past and learn from it the true order in time in which the ances-
tors of each living type appeared on the earth. Every one must see
that this will be of the highest importance as a guide to classification,
and will supplement in the most effective manner the data furnished by
the developed organs of living plants. We shall ultimately see that,
when rightly interpreted, these two sources of proof, instead of con-
flicting, agree in a most instructive manner, rendering that system of
classification which is in harmony with both classes of facts in a high
degree probable and satisfactory.

On the other hand, every candid paleobotanist must admit that he
can understand fossil plants only as they resemble living ones, and
that the botanist, studying the perfect specimen with all its organs of
reproduction as well as of nutrition, can alone declare with absolute cer-
tainty upon its identity or affinity. This mutual dependence of the two
branches of botanical science upon each other is so apparent that it is
certainly a matter of surprise that it has received so little recognition
by scientific men.

ee

368 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

VII.—-HISTORICAL REVIEW OF PALEOBOTANICAL DIS-
COVERY.

A.—-BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES.

Paleobotany is a science of the nineteenth century. Nevertheless its
dawn at the beginning of this century was preceded by a long fading
twilight extending entirely through the eighteenth. Buteven when we
consider the nineteenth century alone, its progress shows us that it
has as yet scarcely entered into the full lightof day. If we judge it by
its literature, not always a safe guide, but certainly the best one we
possess, we find that the first half of this century produced less than
one-fourth as much as the third quarter, and this less than the still un-
finished fourth quarter. If we measure the literature, as we may
roughly do, by the number of titles of books, memoirs, and papers that
have been contributed to it, we will arrive at a rude conception of the
accelerated rate at which the science is advancing.

Ignoring for the present certain vague allusions that were made to
the subject by the ancients and by writers down to the close of the
seventeenth century, some hundred and fifty works might be named
belonging to the eighteenth century that bear in a more or less direct
way upon vegetable fossils, but this would exhaust the enumeration.
A nearly equal number could be named which appeared during the first
quarter of the nineteenth century, while fully two hundred titles, inelud-
ing many large works, issued from the press during the second quarter
of the century. And yet, as already shown, this was but the beginning,
and the true season of interest and activity did not set in until the sixth
decade, since which time this activity has steadily, if not uniformly,
increased until the present, when the number of works and minor
memoirs relating to fossil plants that see the light each year often
reaches a hundred.

Although the number of persons who have interested themselves in
paleobotany and have published more or less upon it is very great, while
those who have become eminent in this field may be counted by scores,
still, if we confine ourselves to such only as may be called pre-eminent,
who have devoted their lives chiefly and successfully to it, and have
either constituted its true founders or enriched in an especial manner
its literature and perfected its methods, we may restrict them to eight
or ten. If called upon to specify, we might reduce this enumeration to
the following great names which stand forth as the true leaders and
heroes of this science: Adolphe Théodore Brongniart, Heinrich Robert
Géppert, Franz Unger, Leo Lesquereux, Oswald Heer, Abramo Massa-
longo, Baron Constantin von Ettingshausen, and the Marquis Gaston
de Saporta. Whether we consider the number of works actually pro-
duced, the volume of this literature, the quality or importance of their

’

WARD.] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES, 369

work, or the amount of painstaking labor devoted to the science, we find
that much more than half of all we possess of permanent value in pa-
leobotany has emanated from the brains, the hands, and the pens of
these eight lifelong and laborious devotees of their chosen science.

It thus appears that the history of paleobotany must consist largely
in an account of the labors of a few persons, and had we nothing more
to offer than such an account, a fairly just conception of its origin, prog-
ress, nature, and scope might be thus afforded. But it might be justly
objected that so limited an enumeration not only leaves out of the ac-
count some of the most impurtant works and most fertile workers, but
also fails to give the true relative importance to those earliest pioneers,
who, though they cannot be classed as the true founders of the science,
nevertheless first pointed out, and then actually broke, the way to fu-
ture research and discovery. Let us then extend our list to cover these
two important classes, and we still find that though much longer than
before it is not so long as to be burdensome. By nearly trebling our
former number the selections may be so made that, while not denying
great eminence and merit to many others, the history of discovery in
vegetable paleontology may be fairly represented by the labors of about
twenty-two men. A bare enumeration of these names in the order in
which they commenced to write would at least embrace the following:

1, Johann Jacob Scheuchzer ...... ..-. 0.0 220 eee eee ee ee eee eee 1709
2. Ernst Friederich, Baron von Schlotheim .........-. highs Sa eels etoaeeins 1801
3. Kaspar Maria, Graf von Sternberg .....--.-..----- +--+ 2-2-2222 eee ee eee eee 1804
4. Adolphe Théodore Brongniart.......- 2... 22. ceee cee eee eee eee eee 1822
5. Henry T. M. Witham... 2.2.22. cece eee cee eee ee cece cece ee cece eee e eens 1829
6. Heinrich Robert Goppert .... 22... 220. en ce eee ce eee ee eee eee eee ee 1834
(cKO GUSH Obl Phi COLA. sic.c:sjaieleiraiis shia wictaresaiaiaibc wieje'dra,e sivve erased sdioalaigarsrarsareciee/S 1838
8. Hans Bruno Geinitz ..---. 22. 2-222 cone ee cee ee cee ee wee cee teen eee 1839
9. Edward William Binney... ..-..--- 222.2 020+ seen ee ee ce eee eee nee ten eee 1839
LO, PPA UD OP :,2js: aie ojsiaieis. sisseroia.s sieves Sirs ob tensiaiee oe eiemie Ge cee Sasiy ce aiemmmerseic 1840
11. Wilhelm Philip Schimper: .:.....22, ssc0c8i-e sie eck Mex sos boeeice seine esis eee sic 1840
12. William Crawford Williamson ........-...-. ----.----5 -02- eee eee eee eee ee 1842
1S: eo. Liesquereuk.: <.<25266 26a: a Sire peel ae ed ike eseee MERE ser are Scans eee 1845
14. Sir John William Dawson ........---- 2202-2 cee ee ee cee nee eee eee 1845
15. Oswald Heer ......---. ---- 12-225 eee eee eee eee nee cece ee cee ce eee tees 1846
16. Sir Charles James Fox Bunbury .-.-..----.- +220 see eee cee ences cee eee ee 1846
17. Abramo Massalongo ..-... .--..----- eee eee eee cee ee ee ee eee ee 1850
18. Constantin, Freiherr von Ettingshausen ......-.-.-.--------++------ +--+ . 1850
19. Jobn Strong Newberry ........---..- 2-22 eens ee ee eee cee cee cee eee eee 1853
20; -Aviatist Schenk .. .<5...c3sc05 serceaeeeeseindeciesweanes teens seems nesceayes 1858
21. Marquis Gaston de Saporta.... .--- ..---. e222 e eee ee ee ee eee cee eee eee 1860
22, William Carruthers .... ..-.2--. 022022 cece cee cee cee eee neces eee eee ees 1865

From this list are omitted the names of a considerable number of the
younger active workers in this field whose thorough and successful work
has already placed them in the front rank, but whose career is so far
from completed that its proper characterization will belong to the fature
historian of the science.

GEOL 84——24

370 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

A brief biographical sketch including the mention of some of the
more important contributions of each of the above-named paleobotanists
may now be made.

1. Scheuchzer.—Switzerland, which furnished one of the last and
greatest of all the cultivators of this science who have now passed
away, furnished also the first name that can with any true propriety
be placed in the list of paleobotanists. Although he wrote on many
other subjects, and worked in some very different fields, the paleon-
tological works of Scheuchzer are the only ones that possess any
enduring value, and although he did not confine his studies to vege-
table fossils, he still gave these a much larger share of his attention
than they now receive from paleontologists in general, compared to
that which is bestowed by them upon the other forms of extinct life.
He was born at Ziirich in 1672, and died in the same city in 1733.
He traveled quite extensively and made large collections of all
kinds of curiosities, which he described and figured in numerous
works. He regarded all fossils as relics of the Noachian deluge, and
gained a permanent place in the history of science by describing the
bones of a gigantic salamander as “Homo diluvii testis.” His most
important work was his “ Herbariom diluvianum,” first published at
Ziirich in 1709, but thoroughly revised and republished at Leyden
in 1723. In this work many fossil plants are figured with sufficient
accuracy for identification. Several of Scheuchzer’s other works con-
tain mention of fossil plants, particularly his ‘‘ Museum diluvianum”
(1716), and his “ Oryctographia helvetica” (in Part III of the “ Hel-
vetie historia naturalis,” 1716-18), but their value to the science, as
indeed that of all his writings, is now chiefly historical. When, how-
ever, we consider that Scheuchzer antedated by almost a full century
the earliest properly scientific treatises on paleobotany, we are prepared
to overlook his deficiencies, and to regard him as the true precursor of
the science.

2. Schlotheim.—Ernst Friedrich, Baron von Schlotheim, of Gotha,
whose career began with the first years of the present century, is the
second name that stands out prominently in the history of paleobotany.
Not that there had not been many in the course of the long century
which separates him from Scheuchzer who had interested themselves in
the study of fossil plants, and who collectively had accumulated the data
which rendered the work of Schlotheim possible, but to him is due the
credit of first marshaling the evidence from vegetable remains in support
of a true science of geology. A sketch of the early struggles and final
triumph of strictly scientific principles as drawn from paleontology will
presently be presented from the phytological side, and we may therefore
content ourselves here with mentioning the grounds upon which Schlot-
heim’s claims rest to a place in the present enumeration.

Born at Almenhausen (Schwarzburg-Sondershausen) in 1764, and
educated at Géttingen and Freiburg, he took up the study of mineralogy

wan.| BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES. 371

and metallurgy, which naturally led him into paleontology, for which he
had a strong attachment. In 1801 he published in Hoff’s “Magazin”
(I, pp. 76-95), at Leipzig, his ““Abhandlung iiber die Kriuter-A bdriicke
im Schieferthon und Sandstein der Steinkohlen-Formation,” and in 1804
his “ Beschreibung merkwiirdiger Kraiiter-A bdriicke und Pflanzen-Ver-
steinerungen, ein Beitrag zur Flora der Vorwelt” (I. Abtheilung), with
fourteen plates, illustrating by accurately drawn figures a large number
of Carboniferous plants. In 1805 he was made councilor director and
in 1820 president of the College Cameral of Saxe-Gotha, and in 1822
director of the Museum at Gotha. In 1820 he published at Gotha “Die
Petrefactenkunde auf ihren jetztigen Standpunkt,” the first Heft of
which really constitutes the second part (Abtheilung) of the work last
mentioned, and the number of plates here reaches twenty-nine, all but
the last two of which are devoted to fossil plants. The remainder of
this work relates to animal remains, as does also all but Part III of the
“Nachtrag” to the work, which appeared two years later.

These works, though few in number, were systematic and conscien-
tious, and constituted by far the most important contribution yet made
to the knowledge of the primordial vegetation of the globe. They form
the earliest strictly scientific record we have in paleobotany.

3. Sternberg.—Kaspar Maria, Graf von Sternberg, though contempo-
rary with Schlotheim, is mentioned after him in this enumeration, first,
because his first contribution to paleobotany? was made three years later
than Schlotheim’s first, and, secondly, because his great work on this
subject was not completed until after Schlotheim’s works were all pub-
lished and in his hands for use and criticism, and, in fact, not until after
Schlotheim’s death.

Sternberg was born at Regensburg in 1761 and died at Prague in
1838. He was an assiduous collector, not only of specimens but of
books, and when in 1822 he was made president of the Bohemian Na-
tional Museum he turned over to it all his collections, including 4,000
volumes of rare works. His specialty was botany, on which he wrote
many memoirs, but scattered through the different periodicals of the
time are to be found some dozen papers relating to fossil plants. The
most important of all his works was his “ Versuch einer geognostich-
botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt,” which appeared in
numbers from 1820 to 1838, and was translated into French by the
Comte de Bray. To the eighth number, 1838, was appended Corda’s
“Skizzen zur vergleichenden Phytotomie vor- und jetztweltlicher
Pflanzen.” In this work that of all his predecessors, including Schlot-
heim, is reviewed, and considerable progress made toward the correct
interpretation of the record, so far as then known, of vegetable paleon-
tology.

3 Notice sur les analogues des plantes fossiles. Annales du Muséum d’histoire natu-
relle, 1804, Vol. V, pp. 462-470, pl. 31, 32.

4+Essai d’un exposé géognostico-botanique de la flore du monde primitif. Ratis-
bonne, 1820-1826, fol., 64 pl.

372 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

4. Brongniart.—Schlotheim and Sternberg may be regarded as pio-
neers of the science of paleobotany. Brongniart is universally admitted
to have been its true founder. The science may properly be said to
have been born in 1828, the year in which both the “ Prodrome” and
the “Histoire des végétaux fossiles” appeared. It was these two works
that gave it that powerful impetus which forced its immediate recogni-
tion and called into its service a large corps of colaborers with Brong-
niart, rapidly multiplying its literature and increasing the amount of
material for its farther study.

Adolpbe Théodore Brongniart was born at Paris in 1801 and died
in the same city in 1876. His father, Alexandre, was eminent in
science, and the author of at least one memoir relating to fossil plants.°
Adolphe turned his attention early to botany and continued through
life to devote himself to living plants; but his great specialty was the
study of the extinct forms, and his labors in this field extend through
nearly half a century. His very first mewoir, ‘Sur la classification et
la distribution des végétaux fossiles en général, et sur ceux des terrains
de sédiment supérieur en particulier,” which appeared in the ‘‘ Mémoires
du Muséum @histoire naturelle de Paris” (pp. 203-240, 297-348) in 1822,
was one of great merit and importance, as shadowing forth the comwnpre-
hensive system which he was to elaborate. It was a decided improve-
ment upon the classifications previously proposed by Steinhauer, Stern-
berg, Martius, etc., and was later employed, with extensive modifications,
in the “Prodrome.” ‘The great ‘‘ Histoire,” though pushed well into
the second volume and enriched by nearly two hundred plates, was un-
fortunately never finished, and has come down to us in this truncated
condition. The causes which led to this result are understood to have
been of a pecuniary character, and the author continued his investiga-
tiovs and published his researches for many years chiefly in the “Annales
des sciences naturelles de Paris.” His next most important work, how-
ever, viz., his “ Tableau des genres de végétaux fossiles,” was published
in the “ Dictionnaire universel @histoire naturelle” in 1849. The mere
mention of these titles gives a very inadequate idea of the importance
of Brongniart’s work. The systematic manner in which the science was
organized and built up by him made him the highest authority on the
subject of fossil plants, and the numerous, more or less elaborate me-
moirs that continued to appear showed that none of the minor details
were neglected. Of his reforms in botanical classification we shall have
occasion later to speak more particularly.

5. Witham.—Henry T.M. Witham, of Edinburgh, was the first of aline
of British investigators who looked beyond the external form of fossil
plants and undertook the systematic study of their internal structure.
It is for this reason rather than on account of the bulk of his works that
his name is inserted in this enumeration. He is well kuown for his de-

5 Notice sur des végétaux fossiles traversant les couches du terrain houiller. Annales
des Mines, Tome VI, 1821, pp. 359-370.

WARD.] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES. 373

scription of the great Carboniferous tree found in the quarries of Craig-
leith, and for other similar investigations. One of his principal works
is entitled “The Internal Structure of Fossil Vegetables found in the
Carboniferous and Oolitic Deposits of Great Britain, described and il-
lustrated,” Edinburgh, 1833. The illustrations are numerous and well
executed, and form a secure basis for all subsequent researches of the
kind.

6. Goppert.—Heinrich Robert Géppert, of Breslau, who was born in
the year 1800 and who has died since this sketch was first drafted, was
the most voluminous writer upon fossil plants that has been produced
thus far. In his “Literarische Arbeiten,” prepared by himself in 1881,
one hundred distinct works, memoirs, and papers are enumerated relat-
ing to this subject, and several have appeared since. Nearly an equal
number relate to living plants, and a few to medicine, which was his pro-
fession. But his work in vegetable paleontology exceeds by far all his
other works in its value to science, embracing as it does many large
treatises on the Paleozoic flora (“ Flora der Uebergangsgebirge”), on the
amber flora, on the fossil Coniferce, on the fossil ferns, etc. Especially
important has been his microscopic work upon the structure of various
kinds of fossil woods, particularly those of the Conifer and the Dicotyl-
edons. Endowed with the true German devotion to his specialty, with
keen observing and analytic powers, with a restless activity, exceptional
opportunities, and long life, he was able to create for the science a vast
wealth of new facts and give ita solid body of laborionsly wrought
truth. If Bronguiart laid the foundations of paleobotany, Géppert may
properly be said to have built its superstructure. Though born one
year earlier than Brongniart, he did not turn his attention to fossil plants
until the latter had been twelve years in that field. His first paper ap-
peared in 1834, or just a half century ago.® It was historical in its
character. Like many other men who have been destined for a great
career, he began it by taking a bird’s-eye view of his subject. He did
not despise the literature of his predecessors, even though they groped
in the darkness of medieval ignorance. With patriotic pride he first told
the story of his own countrymen’s attempts to elucidate the flora of the
ancient world, although even in this paper, he by no means confined
himself to the limits of Silesia, and two years later he published a
great expansion of this historical research as an introduction to his
first great work.”

No attempt within our present limits of space to convey an idea
of the true merits of Géppert’s services to paleobotany could hope to do
them justice, and we can only point to the monument he has himself

6 Ueber die Bestrebungen der Schlesier die Flora der Vorwelt zu erliiutern. Schle-
. sische Provincialblitter, August und September 1834, Also in Karsten und Dechen’s
Archiv, Band VIII, 1835, pp. 232-249,
‘7 Systema filicum fossilium : Die fossilen Farnkriéuter. Nov. Act. Acad. Cas. Leop.
Car., Tom. XVII, suppl., pp. 1-76.

374 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

reared, and enroll his name alongside those of Brongniart, Unger, and
Heer.

7. Oorda.—The propriety of placing Corda’s name in this roll of honor
may be questioned by some, but his contributions to paleobotany were
important, and there can be no doubt that had his life not been prema-
turely cut off they would have been far more so. Born in 1810 at Reich-
enberg, Bohemia, he early turned his attention to botany, and espe-
cially to close histological investigations in fangology. Humboldt,
attracted by his productions, called him to Berlin in 1829, and Stern-
berg recalled him to Prague in 1834. His “Skizzen zur vergleichenden
Phytotomie,” appended to Heft 8 of Sternberg’s ‘Flora der Vorwelt,”
was a valuable addition to that work, and led the way to his two other
principal works, “ Beitrige zur Flora der Vorwelt,” Prague, 1845, and
“Die fossilen Pflanzen der béhmischeu Kreideformation” (in Reuss’s
“ Versteinerungen der béhmischen Kreideformation”), Stuttgart, 1846.
In these works and other of his memoirs a large number of species of
fossil plants are named, described, and carefully figured, forming a
permanent tribute to the growing science. In 1847 Prince Colloredo
sent Corda to Texas to collect scientific material. He remained there
two years, making large accumulations, and started back with them in
the Bremen steamer Victoria, which was lost in the middle of the At-
lantic, and Corda, with all his scientific treasures, went down with her.

8. Geinitz—Only a comparatively small number of Geinitz’s papers
relate to paleobotany, and a still smaller number are devoted exclu-
sively to that subject; and yet not less than thirty-five titles belong to
this department of paleontology. Born at Altenburg in 1814, he has
stood for a full half century in the front rank of continental geologists,
and still continues his indefatigable labors. His protracted studies into
the age and character of the Quadersandstein formation of Germany,
in which so many fossil plants have been found, have shed much light
upon this difficult horizon, while his investigations in the Permian
(Dyas, Zechstein), the Carboniferous, aud the Graywacke have always
led him to study and describe the floras of these periods. We thus pos-
sess in his works a geological authenticity for very many fossil plants,
which all paleobotanists know how to appreciate. His * Characteristik
der Schichten und Petrefakten des sichs.-béhmischen Kreidegebirges,”
Dresden, 1839-42, appears to have been his first work relating to our
subject, and his paleobotanical labors therefore date from 1839.

9. Binney.—If Witham deserved enumeration in our present list for
founding the British school of what may be called phytopaleontological
histologists, Binney must be admitted in recognition of the extent and
importance of his researches in this department. He seems to have
commenced publishing the results of his investigations in 1839,' and

8 The first of his papers whose title appears in the ‘‘ Royal Society Catalogue” is
‘‘On a Microscopic Vegetable Skeleton found in Peat near Gainsborough.” British
Association Report, 1839 (Part II), pp. 71, 72.

WARD.] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES 375

continued them without interruption to the end of his life. His most
important work, on the “Structure of Fossil Plants from the Carbonif-
erous Strata,” published by the Paleontographical Society of London,
was commenced in 1868. His death took place in the year 1882.

10. Unger.—Franz Unger of Steiermark, who was born in 1800 and
died in 1870, was one of the most illustrious of European botanists and
paleontologists. His memoirs and books on paleobotany are only less
numerous than those of Géppert, and among them is an unusually large
number of monographs of great value. His investigations were chiefly
confined to the more recent formations, and his “Chloris protogea,”
“Flora von Sotzka,” “TIconographia plantarum fossilium,” and “Sylloge
plantarum fossilium” are worthy of special mention. His “Synopsis
plantarum fossilium ” and ‘Genera et species” are systematic attempts
to compile the known data of the science in condensed and convenient
form. His first paper? on the subject was published in 1840.

11. Schimper.—Although Schimper contributed a paper” on fossil
plants as early as 1840, and was associated with Mougeot in preparing
their important “Monographie des plantes fossiles du grés bigarré de
la chaine des Vosges” in 1844, as also with Kéchlin-Schlumberger in
his “‘Terrain de transition des Vosges” in 1862, still, but for his great
“Traité de paléontologie végétale,” the third volume of which appeared
in 1874, it is evident that this eminent bryologist would not have
been entitled to be also ranked among the great paleobotanists. The
“Traité” is unquestionably the most important contribution yet made
to the science. Although necessarily to a large degree a compilation
of the work of others, still it is by no means wanting in originality,
and contains a great amount of new matter. Its chief merit, however,
is in its conception and plan as a complete manual of systematic
paleobotany. The classification is highly scientific and rational, and
the discussion of abstruse points in defense of it is acute and cogent.
Every species of fossil plant known to the author is described in Latin,
and much independence is manifested in the rejection of synonyms.
Very important is the geological classification at the end of Volume II,
showing that the author had clear ideas of the uses of the science. The
selections for the atlas are always the very best, and not a few of the
figures are original. Although not in possession of all the extant data,
particularly from America,! Schimper succeeded in supplying in this
work the greatest need of paleobotany. His great talent as an organ-

8Ueber ein Lager vorweltlicher Pflanzen auf der Stangalpe. Steyermarkische
Zeitschrift, Gritz, 1840. I have only been able to consult this memoir in Leonhard &
Bronn’s Neue Jahrbiicher (1842, pp. 607, 608), which may not contain it in extenso.

10Baumfarne, Schachtelhalme, Cycadeen, Aethophyllum, Albertia * * * im bunten
Sandstein der Vogesen; Hysterium auf einem Pappel-Blatte der Wetterauer Braun-
kohle. Leonhard und Broun’s Neue Jahrbiicher, 1840, pp. 336-338. Communication
dated 14. Miirz 1840.

“See ‘The American Journal of Science,” 3d series, Vol. XXVII (April. 1884), p. 296.

376 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

izer and text-book writer was again seen in his able contribution to
Zittel’s “Handbuch der Paléontologie.”

Wilhelm Philip Schimper was born at Dosenheim (Alsace) in 1808,
and died at Strasbourg, where most of his work had been done, in 1880.
He became director of the Museum of National History of Strasbourg
in 1839.

12. Williamson.—_In Mr. W. C. Williamson we have a third of the
line of eminent British paleobotanists, whose chief attention has been
directed to the study of the internal structure of Carboniferous plants,
and the one who at the present time unquestionably stands at the head
of this school of investigators. If we include his paper “‘On the Origin
of Coal,” published in the report of the British Association for 1842
(Part IT, pp. 48, 49), his place would be where we have assigned bim,
but his special work upon the plants themselves seems not to have
commenced until 1851, and then to have been more or less interrupted
until 1868, since which time it has been incessant, culminating in his
great work “On the Organization of the Fossil Plants of the Coal
Measures,” which runs through so many volumes of the ‘‘ Philosophical
Transactions.” Of the merits of this work, as of all of this author’s
investigations, it is certainly unnecessary to speak here.

13. Lesquereux.—Mr. Leo Lesquereux of Columbus, Ohio, is one of those
acquisitions which America has so often made at Europe’s expense when
political turmoils arise there and make liberty dearer even than country.
He was of that little band, which also included Agassiz and Guyot, who
were compelled to abandon Switzerland in 1847 and 1848, on the occasion
of the breaking up of the Academy of Neuchatel and the coming into
power of the so-called Liberal party. His ancient family name was Les-
cure, afterwards Lescurieux, and finally Lesquereux, and his immediate
ancestors were French Huguenots. He was born November 18, 1806, at
Fleurier, canton of Neuchatel. His father was a manufacturer of watch
springs and endeavored to teach him that business, though, since bis
health was somewhat delicate, his mother preferred to prepare him for
the ministry ; but Science had marked him for her own, and no power
could withdraw him from nature. With a taste for plants in geveral,
he was led by circumstances first to the study of mosses, then naturally
to that of peat, and lastly to that of fossil plants. The government of
Neuchatel was then greatly interested in the protection of peat bogs on
account of the difficulty of procuring fuel for the poor, and offered a
prize (a gold medal of 20 ducats) for the best memoir on the formation
and preservation of peat. Lesquereux competed and won the prize.
His prize memoir” gained a wide reputation, was extensively copied,
and is still quoted as one of the best on the subject.

2 Quelques recherches sur les marais tourbeux en général. Mémoires de la Société
des sciences naturelles de Neuchatel, Tome III, 1845. (See summary in the Archives
des sciences phys. et nat. de Gendve, Tome VI, p. 154.)

WARD.) BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES. B17

The connecting link between this study and that of fossil plants was
supplied two years later, when he wrote a short paper “Sur les plantes
qui forment la houille,”

On his arrival in America he studied the coal formations of Ohio,
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, and other States, and his
reports appear in those of the geological surveys of all of these States.
Especially important are those upon the coal flora of Pennsylvania.
The first of these appeared in the second volume of the report of H. D.
Rogers, in 1858, consisting of some quite elaborate “General Remarks,”
and a “Catalogue of the Fossil Plants which have been Named or De-
scribed from the Coal Measures of North America.” This is accom.
panied by twenty-three excellent plates. But this was a mere begin-
ning, for when the second geological survey of Pennsylvania was un-
dertaken Mr. Lesquereux was employed to work up the coal flora,
which appeared in 1880 in a volume of text and an atlas, the most im-
portant work on carboniferous plants that has been produced in Amer-
ica, A third volume, supplementary to these, has just been issued.

In 1868 Mr. Lesquereux began the study of the floras of later forma-
tions in the West, and contributed an important paper on the Cretaceous
leaves of Nebraska to the “American Journal of Science.”"* Dr. F. V.
Hayden employed him to work up the eollections of his surveys of the
Territories, and important papers on the subject appeared in the annual
reports of the survey for 1870, 1871, 1872, 1873, and 1874. In the last
of these years appeared his ‘Cretaceous Flora,” forming Volume VI of
the quarto reports. In 1878 the seventh volume of these quarto reports
was published, a still larger work, devoted to what he called the “ Ter-
tiary Flora,” though a very large proportion of: the species were from
the Laramie Group. The eighth of these volumes will also be by Mr.
Lesquereux, and will consist of a thorough revision of the entire Creta-
ceous and Tertiary floras of North America. Mr. Lesquereux is still liv-
ing, and though infirm with age is actively engaged in bryological and
paleontological studies.

14. Dawson.—To Sir J. W. Dawson is due the greater part of the knowl-
edge we possess concerning the vegetable paleontology of Canada and the
British North American provinces in general. His numerous papers, run-
ning back as far as 1845," are almost exclusively confined to the descrip-
tion and illustration of material from this part of the world, and all
except a few recent ones relate to the older formations of the East.

i3 Archives des sciences physiques et naturelles (Bibliotheque universelle), Tome VI,
1847, pp. 158-162. Geneve.

144Qn Some Cretaceous Fossil Plants from Nebraska, Am, Journ. Sci., 2d series,
Vol, XLVI (July, 1868), pp. 91-105.

15 His paper ‘On the Newer Coal Formation of the Eastern Part of Nova Scotia”
(Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lond., Vol. I, 1845, pp. 322-330) merely names a few genera
occurring there, but his ‘Notices of Some Fossils Found in the Coal Formation of
Nova Scotia” (1. c., Vol. II, 1846, pp. 132-136), giving his views on Sternbergia, at-
tracted immediate attention. ;

378 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

His reports upon “The Fossil Plants of the Devonian and Upper Silu-
rian Formations of Canada,” upon “The Fossil Plants of the Lower
Carboniferous and Millstone Grit Formations of Canada,” and upon
“The Fossil Plants of the Erian (Devonian) and Upper Silurian Forma-
tions of Canada” are monographs of especial value. A geologist rather
than a botanist, he has done excellent service, not only in elucidating
the important problems of Acadian geology, but also in demonstrating
the value and legitimacy of the evidence furnished by vegetable remains.

Dawson was born at Pictou, Nova Scotia, in the year 1820, and though
educated at Edinburgh, he returned to his native country and has de-
voted his whole life to the study of its geology and paleontology. He<s
a fellow of the Royal Society of London and of the Geological Society,
and has long honored the well-known post of Principal of McGill Uni-
versity, Montreal. We learn with great satisfaction, though almost too
late to be fittingly mentioned here, that the order of knighthood has
just been conferred upon him on the occasion of the meeting of the Brit-
ish Association in his adopted city.

15. Heer.—The numerous obituary notices that have so recently ap-
peared in all the scientific journals render it unnecessary to give in this
place any extended biographical sketch of this eminent savant. He was
born at Glarus, Switzerland, in 1809, and died at Lausanne in 1883, after
having long filled the chair of botany in the University of Ziirich. Vege-
table paleontologists note with some surprise that he is mentioned by
his biographers chiefly as an entomologist,'§ and naturally wonder how
great must have been his eminence in that department to overshadow
his vast and invaluable labors in the domain of fossil plants.

He commenced writing upon this latter subject in 1846. The first
volume of his great work, “Flora tertiaria Helvetie,” appeared in 1855,
the second in 1856, and the third in 1859. The exceedingly great care,
accuracy, and thoroughness with which this chef d’euvre of science was
-executed, especially in the matter of illustration, is a marvel to com-
template. Nothing comparable to it had appeared before, and nothing
equal to it has appeared since. He became interested in the fossil floras
of remote parts of the globe, and among the first of his memoirs on such
subjects was one that may be found in the Proceedings of the Academy
of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1858 (pp. 265-266), on the “ Fos-
sil plants of the Lower Cretaceous beds of Kansas and Nebraska.” He
-also figured the ‘‘ Phyllites Crétacées du Nébraska,” collected by Marcou
and Capellini.% In 1866 his memoirs upon the fossil floras of the Are-
tic regions commenced to appear, and to this fertile subject he devoted
the greater part. of the rest of his life. The first volume of his “ Flora

16 Science,” Vol. II, p. 583, 1883; “Nature,” Vol. XXVIII, Oct. 25, 1883.

The first paper of which there is a record is the one “ Ueber die von ihm an der
hohen Rhone entdekten fossilen Pflanzen,” which appeared in the Verhandlungen
der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft for 1846, pp. 35-38.

‘8Neue Denkschriften der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft der Naturforscher, Ziirich
1866, Mém. I. :

WARD ] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES. 379

fossilis arctica” appeared in 1869, the second in 1871, and the remaining
five at intervals of about two years,the seventh and last coming out
in the year of the author’s death. With the exception of the first vol-
ume, this colossal work consists entirely of a compilation of more or less
independent memoirs, which were published as fast as prepared in vari-
ous scientific periodicals in several languages, and which are merely put
together into volumes of convenient thickness. Each memoir has its
own independent pagination, generally that of the volume of Transac-
tions in which it originally appeared, all of which renders it very incon-
venient for consultation, but cannot detract from its great value as a
reservoir of facts.

Bunbury.—It may be doubtful whether the paleobotanical works of Sir
Charles Bunbury are of sufficient importance to entitle him to enumer-
ation among the principal cultivators of that science, but they have cer-
tainly been quite numerous and covered a wide range of subjects, both
geographically and botanically. He began by elaborating certain ma-
terial from the United States’? and the British provinces,” collected by Sir
Charles Lyell and Dr. Dawson, and was the first to recognize the merits
of the views of the latter respecting the fossils known as Sternbergia from
the coal fields of Sydney. But he also worked up material from France,
Portugal, Madeira, and India, as well as from Yorkshire and other parts
of England. His investigations have been chiefly confined to carbon-
iferous fossils, but in a quite recent work”! he has published some inter-
esting views on the subject of nervation which may prove of value.

17. Massalongo.—Abramo Massalongo, the first of the Italian school
of paleobotanists whose work claims our attention here, commenced pub-
lishing in 1850,” and continued with great activity until 1861. He con.
fined his investigations almost exclusively to material from his own
country, and contributed more to the elucidation of the fossil floras of
Italy than any other author. The number of his papers is very large,
considering the comparatively short period during which he was per-
mitted to work, and an unusually large percentage of them are mono-
graphs of considerable size. His greatest work, for which Scarabelli
contributed the stratigraphical part, was his “Studii sulla flora fossile
e geologia stratigraphica del Senigalliese,” Imola, 1859, but of which

19Qn some remarkable Fossil Ferns from Frostburg, Md., collected by Mr. Lyell.
Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., 1846, Vol. II, pp. 82-91. Observations on the Fossil Plants of
the Coal Field of Tuscaloosa, Ala., etc. Silliman’s Journal, 1846, pp. 228-233. Descrip-
tion of Fossil Plants from the Coal Field near Richmond, Va., Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,
1847, Vol. III, pp. 281-288.

20 Notes on some Fossil Plants, communicated by Mr. Dawson, from Nova Scotia.
Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., 1846, Vol. II, pp. 136-139. On Fossil Plants from the Coal
Formation of Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. Ibid., 1847, Vol. III., pp. 433-428, and nu-
merous similar memoirs.

2 Botanical Fragments. London, 1883.

2 See his Schizzo geognostico sulla Valle di Progno (Preludium Flore fossilis Bol-
censis), Verona, 1850. Collett. dell’ Adige, 14 sett., 1850.

380 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

his “Synopsis flore fossilis Senogalliensis,” Verona, 1858, forms an in-
tegral part, having been prepared from the plates of the former, to
which reference is constantly made. This work is thoroughly illustrated
by forty-five large quarto plates of well executed but not very well
printed figures, and is one of the most important contributions to the
Tertiary flora of Europe. It virtually and fittingly closed the too short
but perhaps too active career of one of Italy’s most talented scientists

18. Ettingshausen.—Since the death of Oswald Heer the great merits
of Baron von Ettingshausen’s paleobotanical researches, always highly
appreciated, have seemed to command especial attention. Beginning
this career simultaneously with Massalongo in the year 1850,” he has had
the advantage over the Italian savant of being permitted to continue it
uninterruptedly under the most favorable auspices down to the present
time. Heimmediately began his studies in the Tertiary flora of the Aust-
riau Monarchy, and published the Tertiary Flora of Vienna in 1851.
His “Beitriige zur Flora der Vorwelt,” “‘Proteaceen der Vorwelt,” and
numerous lesser papers appeared in the same year. From the number
of important papers that appeared during 1852 and 18533 it is clear that
he must have been very active, entering as he did into the study of
Paleozoic and Mesozoic floras, as well as continuing his work ou the
Tertiary plants. It was, however, in 1854 that he laid the foundation
for that deserved renown which he now enjoys in taking up under such
extraordinarily favorable conditions the investigation of the true prin-
ciples of nervation in dicotyledonous leaves. The process of nature-
printing, or physiotypy (Naturselbstdruck), had been invented in the
Austrian imperial court and state printing-office by Auer and Wor-
ring, and Ettingshausen at once perceived its special applicability to
the science of botany. Recognizing the vast importance of this dis-
covery to paleobotany he obtained permission to employ the new method
and proceeded to prepare his first monograph ‘“ Ueber die Nerva-
tion der Blatter und blattartigen Organe bei den Euphorbiaceen mit
besonderer Riicksicht auf die vorweltlichen Formen,”™ which he fol-
lowed up with a similar memoir, “ Ueber die Nervation der Bliitter der
Papilionaceen.* To the first of these memoirs was prefixed a brief
synopsis of the classes of uervation found in eupborbiaceous leaves.
Availing himself of the efforts in this direction which had been pre-
viously made by Leopold von Buch,” Bianconi,’? and others (he seems

No less than four of his papers appeared in that year, one in the Sitzungsberichte
of the Vienna Academy, one in the first volume of the Austrian Geological Jahrbuch,
and two in the sixth volume of Haidinger’s Collections of Memoirs.

*4Sitzungsberichte d. Akad. d. Wiss. Wien. Bd. XII, 1854, pp. 138-154, Pl. I-X VII.

% Loe. cit., pp. 600-663, PI. I-XXII.

Ueber die Blattnerven und ihre Vertheilung. Monatsbericht der Berliner Aka-
demie der Wissenschaft, 1852, pp. 42-49, with plate.

"7Giuseppe G. Bianconi. Sul sistema vascolare delle foglie, considerato come carat-
tere distintivo per la determinazione delle filliti. N. Ann. d. Sc. Nat. Bologna, 1838,
Ann. I, Tom. I, pp. 343-390, Pl. VII-XIII.

WARD.] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCIES. 381

not to have been acquainted with De Candolle’s “Organogénie”), he
proposed a classification and terminology, which, so far as they weut,
Heer was willing to adopt,” and which are in common use by paleo-
botanists at the present time. In 1855 Ettingshausen and Pokorny
received instructions to prepare a work: for the Paris Exposition to be
held in 1867 that should thoroughly illustrate the application of the
nature-printing process to the science of botany. The result was that
immense and astonishing production entitled “ Physiotypia plantarum
Austriacarum,” with its six enormous volumes of most exquisite plates,
not only illustrating the leaves of the trees and shrubs, the flowers with
their petals, sepals, stamens, and pistils, but the entire plants wherever
within the ample limits of size, and these stand forth from the plates
in actual relief like a veritable hortus siccus. This grand success was
followed up by various monographs upon the nervation of certain impor-
tant orders, as the Celastrinew, Bombacee, Graminex, etc. Aided
further by this magic process he commenced in 1858” a series of
works illustrating the skeletons only of leaves, the most important
of which is his “ Blattskelette der -Dykotyledonen,” which appeared
in 1861. The way thus cleared for the successtul study of the Terti-
ary floras of the world, Ettingshausen, from this time on, has continued
his important investigations in this field, and each year our knowledge
of fossil plants is increased and extended by his enlightened con-
tributions. It would carry us quite beyond our limits to attempt an
eumeration here even of the most important of these memoirs, but
we cannot complete our brief sketch of Ettingshausen’s invaluable
labors without a passing reference to such productions as his Flora
of the Tertiary basin of Bilin, his Cretaceous Flora of Niederschéna,
his Floras of Wetterau, Steiermark, Radoboj, Sagor, etc. Coupled
with his great powers of accurate observation and strictly scientific
method of investigation, Ettingshausen displays an unusually broad
grasp of the deeper problems which paleobotany presents and has un-
doubtedly been for many years far in advance of all his contemporaries
in this field in correctly apprehending and announcing the true laws of
phytochorology and plant development.

Baron von Ettingshausen was born in 1826 at Vienna, and is a member
of many learned societies and scientific bodies.

19. Newberry.—Dr. John Strong Newberry, of the School of Mines,
Columbia College, New York, one of the most eminent American geolo-
gists, was born at New Windsor, Conn., December 22 , 1822, and gradu-
ated at Western Reserve College in 1846. Two years later he took the
degree of M.D. from Cleveland Medical College, Ohio. Before com-
menciog the practice of his profession at Cleveland, in 1851, he spent
two years in Europe. On his return opportunities soon presented them-

Flora Tertiaria Helvetia, Band II, pp. 2-6.
2The first was his “ Blattskelette der Apetalen,” Wiener Denkschriften, Band XV,

1853, pp. 181-272, with fifty-one plates.

382 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

selves for joining parties of exploration in the far West, and he finally
became a member of the celebrated Ives Exploring Expedition. With
a special fondness for geology and mining he combined a deep interest in
paleontology, in all of which specialties he has distinguished himself.
The Carboniferous formation of Ohio had early interested him much,
and especially the vegetable remains found embedded in it, and as far
back as 1853 we find him reading papers before the American Associa-
tion, ‘‘On the structure and affinities of certain fossil plants of the Car-
boniferous era,” and ‘‘On the Carboniferous Flora of Ohio, with descrip-
tions of fifty new species of fossil plants.”*° In 1859 he reported upon
the fossils, including plants, of the Macomb Exploring Expedition,” in
1861 those of Lieutenant Ives’s Expedition,” and in 1863, those of the
Northwest Boundary Commission.” Probably the most important of his
paleobotanical memoirs thus far published was his “ Notes on the Later
Extinct Floras of North America,” which appeared in the Annals of the
New York Lyceum of Natural History for April, 1868. No plates ac-
companied this memoir, but a large number of the plants described had
been figured by Dr. Newberry, which he had expected to be published
by the Geological Survey of the Territories, but none appeared until
1873.** He has, however, been more or less constantly engaged since
that time in figuring the large collections which have been reaching him
each year at the School of Mines, and over one hundred plates have, up
to the present writing, been prepared, most of which are printed and
awaiting the text of a large work which will be published by the United
States Geological Survey.

20. Schenk.—Hofrath Dr. August Schenk, professor of botany at
the University of Leipsic, was born at Hallein, Upper Austria, in 1815,
and held the chair of botany at Miinich and Wiirzbach before being
called to that of Leipsic. His paleobotanical researches have been
chiefly directed towards a little known horizon lying between the Bunt-
ersandstein and the Lias, and upon this dark region they have shed a
flood of light. His earlier papers* related to fossil plants from the Keu-
per, chiefly collected in the vicinity of Bamberg and Bayreuth, and, in
addition to material collected by himself and Dr. Kirchner, he elaborated
that brought together by the Count of Miinster, but later he turned his
attention to some rich plant beds overlying these strata and situated in-
termediate between them and the Lias. It is upon this narrow horizon

20Proceedings, pp. 157-166.

51 Report of the Expedition, pp. 142-148, Pl. IV-VIII.

* Report upon the Colorado River of the West, by Lieut. Joseph C. Ives, Washington,
1861, pp. 129-132., Pl. IIL

* Boston Journal of Natural History, Vol. VII, 1863, pp. 506-524,

*INustrations of Cretaceous and Tertiary plants. Washington, Government Printing
Office, 1878.

35 The earliest seems to have been ‘ Ueber einem in der Keuperformation bei Wiirz-
burg aufgefundenen fossilen Farnstamm (Chelepteris strongylopeltis). Verhandlun-

gen der Wiirzburger physicalisch—medicinschen Gesellschaft, Band VIII, 1858, pp.
212-216,

WanD.] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES. 383:

that he has bestowed the closest attention, and his final monograph
upon the subject, which, dropping the term Rhetic, he has entitled ‘‘ Die-
fossile Flora der Grenzschichten des Keupers und Lias Fratikens,” is a
very valuable contribution to paleobotany. Still later (1868), he took
ap the Muschelkalk beds of Recoaro, first noticed by Catullo,® but
treated by a number of authors, and produced a finely illustrated little.
work “ Ueber die Pflanzenreste des Muschelkalkes von Recoaro.” Be-
sides his “Beitrage zur Flora der Vorwelt” in the Palwontographica,.
and numerous minor contributions, Dr. Schenk has elaborated the fossil
plants for Baron Richthofen’s ‘“China,”*? and, since Schimper’s death,
has gone on with the vegetable department of Zittel’s ‘‘ Handbuch der
Paladontologie.”*

21. Saporta.—The death of Professor Heer broke up the illustrious:
trio of continental paleobotanists who had so long taken the lead in the
study of the fossil plants of the Tertiary formation—Heer, Ettings-
hausen, and Saporta. The two that remain are of more nearly the same
age, aud in many respects admit of a more ready comparison; still their
fields of labor are so well separated that no conflict can occur in their
operations, and both seem likely to continue uninterrupted for many
years their already extensive investigations.

The Marquis (until a year ago Count) Gaston de Saporta, was bormr
in the year 1823 at Saint Zacharie, department of Var, in Provence,
France, and it was in the near vicinity of his native place that he first
began” his paleobotanical studies, and to the thorough illustration of
the fossil botany of Provence he has always devoted his best energies.
His “Etudes sur la végétation du sud-est de la France 4 Pépoque terti-
aire,’ begun in 1863, has thus far remained his chef @euvre, and most:
of the localities treated in this work are situated in Provence. In 1873.
he published “La revision de la flore fossile des gypses d’Aix,” which
was practically a revision of the “Etudes.”41| Among his other more
important works on Cenozoic floras may be mentioned his ‘“ Prodrome
dune flore fossile des travertins de Sézanne,”” in which the flora of the
Eocene, or Paleocene, as he terms it, is better set forth than in any other
work, and his “Essai sur l’état de la végétation 4 |’époque des marnes-

36Nuovi annali di scienzi natur. di Bologna, serie II, Tom. V. 1846, pp. 81-107 (see
p. 106).

37 Band IV, pp. 209-269, 284-288, Pl. KXXX-LIV.

38 TT, Band, III. Lieferung.

39 Note sur les plantes fossiles de la Provence, Lausanne. Bulletin de la Société vau-
doise des sciences naturelles, Tome VI, 1860, pp. 505-514. Examen analytique des.
flores tertiaires de Provence, Ziirich, 1861.

40 Annales des sciences naturelles—Botanique—4? série, tomes XVI XVII, XIX; 5¢
série, Tomes III, IV, VIII, IX, 1661-68.

4 Loe. cit., 5¢ série, Tome XVIII.

42Mémoires de la Société géologique de France, Tome VIII, 1865, pp. 289-438, Pl..
XXII-XXXVI.

384 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

heersiennes de Gelinden,” in which, as in his “Recherches sur les végé-
taux fossiles de Meximieux,” he was assisted by Prof. A. F. Marion.
But Saporta’s contributions do not all relate to the Tertiary. Of nearly
equal importance have been his studies in the Jurassic flora of France.

The three volumes of his “Plantes jurassiques,”* which have already
appeared, with accompanying atlas, constitute, without any doubt, the
most exhaustive treatise upon the vegetable paleontology of that hori-
zon that has thus far been produced. Its value is by no means confined
to the light it throws upon the Mesozoic flora of France. The manner ip
which the determinations are supported by comparison with other fos-
sil and with living floras, renders the work a thoroughly general ove.
Indeed no better treatise exists on the histology of coniferous stems and
on the classifications of the Conifers in general than is to be found in
the introduction to the third volume of this work. Besides numerous
other minor descriptive papers and memoirs of greater or less length and
importance on fossil plants, Marquis Saporta has written two interesting
popular books on the subject. That entitled “‘Le Monde des Plantes
avant Papparition de Vhomme,” which appeared in 1879, is unquestion-
ably the best popular treatise in this branch of science. The first vol-
ume of the work on ‘‘L’evolution du régne végétal,” confined entirely to
astudy of the Cryptogams from the point of view of evolution, appeared
in 1281 as one of the International Scientific Series, though it seems
never to have been translated into English. In this work Professor
Marion was associated. Other volumes showing the evidence of phe-
nogamous plants for the doctrine of evolution are anxiously looked for.
Saporta has long been a strong supporter of this class of views, and his
writings display a broad and enlightened spirit.

22. Carruthers.—The subject of this sketch was born at Moffat, Scot-
land, and educated in Edinburgh. In 1859 he entered the British Museum
as assistant in botany, and became keeper of the department of botany in
1871. He began his paleobotanical work by re-editing Lindley and Hut-
ton’s “ Fossil Flora of Great Britain,” and is understood to be now prepar-
ing asupplementtoit. During this time he has been constantly contribut-
ing articles upon various points connected with his investigations. The
number of such papers is very large and their merit so great that his
title to a place in the present enumeration will not probably be disputed.
Although pursuing somewhat the same line of investigation as the other
British paleobotanists, he still has given himself a much wider field.
He has not limited his researches to the Paleozoic, but has made incur-
sions into the Mesozoic and even into the Tertiary. Fossil fruits have
formed a favorite study for him, and his investigations have widely

Mémoires couronnés de l’Académie des sciences de Belgique, Bruxelles, 4¢ édition,
Tome XXXVII, No. 6, 1873.

“ Archives du Muséum Whistoire naturelle de Lyon, 4¢ livraison, 1876, p. 131.

# Paléontologie francaise. Série 2. Végétaux, 1873, 1875, and 1876-1883.

WARD. ] EARLY HISTORY OF PALEOBOTANY. 385

expanded this field of knowledge. Mr. Carruthers was elected a fellow
of the Royal Society: in 1871.

In terminating this enumeration here it is evident that the limit of
space and not of matter has been the motive. The aim has been rather
to consider the great names in the past history of the science than to
venture an estimate of the worth of present workers in it, and if a num-
ber of living representatives have been named it is because their services
have already been so great as to have given a special color to that his-
tory and to afford a safe basis for judging of their future work. With
most of the many present devotees of paleobotany this last condition at
least does not exist, and the fear of coming far short of doing them
justice, at least in the estimation of their future biographers, has de-
terred me from introducing their names into this brief résumé.

But aside from this class no little difficulty has been encountered in
choosing from among the older workers, and although in many cases
no two would agree where the line should be drawn, it is by no means
improbable that some obvious mistakes have been made, and that names
which have been omitted should have been substituted for-some that
have been mentioned. Defects of this class, and also those of various
other kinds, may, however, be partially remedied in the treatment of
the next division of the subject, in which the field will be less restricted
in this respect, and we shall look more especially to the work done than
to the men who have done it.

B.—SKETCH OF THE EARLY HISTORY AND SUBSEQUENT PROGRESS
OF PALEOBOTANY.

1. THE PRE-SCIENTIFIC PERIOD.

Science often has its origin in wonder at unexplained phenomena, and
there is no science of which this is more true than of paleontology.
Nearly all the early writers openly avow that they have been chiefly
spurred on to undertake and carry on their investigations by an ‘‘eager
curiosity” respecting the objects they were treating, and the first col-
lections of such objects were looked upon simply as curiosities, while
what have since become the greatest scientific institutions in the world
sometimes betray their origin by perpetuating the original names
expressive of their sense of wonder.”

No greater objects of wonder have presented themselves to man’s
consideration than the fossils which from the earliest times have been
observed in different parts of the earth’s crust. The efforts of the ra-
tional mind to interpret these phenomena, although they may seem
amusing to the unthinking, are really of deep philosophic and even
scientific interest. It may surprise some to learn that the conclusions

46 Parkinson’s Organic Remains of a Former World, 1804, p. v.
For example the great Academia Casarea Leopoldino-Carolina Nature Curiosorum,
founded in 1670 at Frankfort-on-the-Main.
GEOL 84 25

386 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

reached by the ancients were far more correct than those drawn twelve
to sixteen centuries Jater, from much more ample data. Strabo, Xeno-
phanes, Xanthus, Eratosthenes, and even Herodotus believed that the
fossil shells they had seen once contained living animals, and that in
process of time they had been turned into stone. They further con-
cluded that the mountains in which they were found imbedded were
once under the sea. These doctrines were known to the Romans, and
of their popular acceptance by the cultivated classes we have evidence
in the familiar lines of Ovid’s “ Metamorphosis.” “ This view was also
shared by Pliny and other post-Augustan writers, and even Tertullian®
did not perceive its inconsistency with Christian philosophy, which caused
its complete rejection during the next thirteen centuries. Of the fact
of this long stagnation not only in this but in nearly all other depart-
ments of science there is no question, but as to its cause there are dif-
ferences of opinion which this is not the place to discuss. The doubt-
less charitable attempt, however, to throw the responsibility back upon
Aristotle and his famous doctrine of generatio equivoca,*' merely because
that doctrine was found more in harmony with the cosmogony which
became ingrafted upon those sombre ages, should, in the single interest
of historic truth, be condemned, while it is too late in the scientific
epoch to make it either necessary or prudent to hesitate in confessing
that the reasoning powers of man were virtually destroyed during that
period by the almost universal and thoroughly honest acceptance of a
false cosmogony.”

48 Vidi ego, quod fuerat quondam solidissima tellus
Esse fretum, vidi factas ex equore terras,
Et procul a pelago conche jacuere marine,
Et vetus inventa est in montibus ancora summis.”
(Lib. XV, 262.)

49“ Mutavit et totus orbis aliquando, aquis omnibus obsitus; adhuc maris conche et
buccing perigrinantur in montibus, cupientes Platoni probare etiam ardua fluitasse.”
(De Pallio, II.) ;

50 “During the next thirteen or fourteen centuries fossil remains of animals and
plants seem to have attracted so little attention that-few references are made to them
by writers of this period. During these ages of darkness all departments of knowl-
edge suffered alike, and feeble repetitions of ideas derived from the ancients seein to
have been about the only contributions of that period to natural science.” (Address
of Prof. O. C. Marsh as president of the American Association for the Advancement
of Science, 1879. -‘ Proceedings,” Vol. XXVIII, p. 4.)

51 “In den darauf folgenden Zeiten verdriingte die aristotelische und nachherige
scholastiche Philosophie die Naturkunde, wobei man nattirlich auch die Petrefakten
fast ginzlich vernachlassigte und sie fast nur erwihnte, um die ungegriindete Lehre
des Aristoteles von der generatio equivoca alsbald auch auf sie anzuwenden.” (Gop-
pert, Systema Filicum Fossilium, p. 4.)

52“ Cette science eut beaucoup plus de peine a se développer que les autres sciences
naturelles, telles que la physique et la chimie, car elle rencontra tout d’abord une op-
position religieuse qui en entrava longtemps les progrés. L’orthodoxie biblique craig-
nant que la science ne s’écartat trop des traditions de la Gendse, interdisait aux savants
Vétude indépendante des fossiles, dans lesqueles elle ne voyait que les débris des étres
anciens détruits par le déluge de Noé.” (Schimper, Traité de paléontologie végétale
Tome I, p. 6.)° ;

WARD.] IGNORANCE OF THE ANCIENTS. 387

It is only in so far as they relate to fossil plants that these general
considerations can be entered into here, although so closely are all
branches of paleontology blended in those early and, as it were, undif-
ferentiated stages of their historical development that too strict a con-
struction of this rule might exclude matter which has an important
bearing upon paleobotany. The special science, however, must be
regarded as very much younger than the general one. Indeed, while
there is no doubt that the ancients were familiar with several kinds of
animal fossils, particularly shells and corals, it is generally believed
that they were wholly unacquainted with any form of vegetable petri-
faction.» This complete ignorance seems to have continued through-
out the middle ages down to the thirteenth century.

It is certainly surprising that so common an object as a piece of pet-
rified wood should never have been observed by intelligent people in-
habiting limestone regions like those of Greece and Italy, and it is hard
to believe that this was really the case. It is more reasonable to suppose
that such things were sometimes seen and wondered at by rustics, but
that for some reason they escaped being recorded; or they may have
been recorded in some work that has failed to come down to us, like the
two lost books of Theophrastus.

53 “« Drempreintes végétales ou de débris végétaux pétrifiés, nulle mention chez les
anciens.” (Schimper, loc. cit., p.1. See also Brongniart, Histoire des végétaux fos-
siles, Tome I, p. 1; Sprengel, Commentatio de Psarolithis, p. 7; Géppert, Syst. Fil.
Foss., p. 8.)

The following are among the passages most commonly quoted in support of the
opposite view :

“Palmati [lapides] circa Mundam in Hispania, ubi Casar dictator Pompeium vicit,
quoties fregeris.” (Tothe word “palmati” is attached the following foot-note: ‘ Qui
palme intus fracti referant.”) (Plinius, Nat. Hist., XXXVI, 29. Delphin Classics,
111, Pliny, 9, p. 4749.)

“In Ciconum flumine, et in Piceno lacu Velino lignum deiectum, lapideo cortice
obducitur, et in Surio Colchidis flumine, adeo ut lapidem plerumque durans adhuc
integat cortex. Similiter in Silaro, ultra Surrentum, non virgulta modo immersa,
verum et folia lapidescunt, alias salubri potu ejus aque. In exitu paludis Reatinz
saxum crescit.” (Loe. cit., II, 106.)

“‘Syringitis -stipule, internodio similis, perpetua fistula cavatur.” (Loe. cit.,
XXXVII, 67.) :

“Qui navigavere in Indos Alexandri milites frondem marinarum arborum tradi-
dere in aqua viridem fuisse, exemptam sole protinus in salem arescentem. Juncos
[truncos] quoque lapideos perquam similes veris per littora,” ete. (Theophrastus,
loc. cit., XIII, 51.) : 7 :

“‘Quarti generis elatiten vocari quamdiu crudus sit: coctum vero militen, utilem
ambustis, ad omnia utiliorem rubrica.” (Loe. cit., XXXVI, 38.)

‘‘ Dryites e trancis arborum: hee et ligni modo ardet.” (Loe. cit., XX XVII, 73.)

Consult also, Theophrastus, Hepz Azfcv, Sect. XXIX; Strabo, Geographica, Lib.
XVI; and Pausanias, Greciz Descriptio, Lib. I, cap. 43.

All these passages have, however, been carefully studied, and the conclusion reached
that they refer only to stones resembling trunks, fruits, etc., to madrepores, to in-
crustations, or other mineral substances, and not in any case to real petrifactions.

388 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

Brongniart has offered an apology for the ancients, on the ground
' that no coal mines occur in Greece or Rome, and that Spain, Northern
Africa, and Western Asia, with which alone they were acquainted, are
all equally wanting in that formation; and he very truly remarks that
the knowledge of fossil plants really began simultaneously with the use
of coal, as the destruction of the forests of Western and Northern Eu-
rope forced the growing population to discover some substitute for
wood as fuel. This is quite true so far as coal plants are concerned,
and somewhat so for all those fossils which are only exposed by min-
ing, yet when we consider the extensive public works that were carried
on by the Romans, in connection with the large number of rich beds of
fossil plants now known in Italy, Dalmatia, Euboea, and with the pet-
rified forests of northern Egypt and other countries of the Roman Em.
pire, some other explanation is certainly needed to account for the
silence of ancient literature upon the subject. This is to be found in
the highly artificial character of their civilization, and the little interest
taken in or attention paid to the phenomena of nature around them.
This state of society can be easily imagined by eliminating from our
own society the very minute fraction of the citizens of any modern coun-
try who ever observe or reflect upon natural objects or phenomena. In
any Jarge city these can almost be counted upon the fingers, and this
could then be done for the whole Roman Empire, while during the suc-
ceeding ages even these few were wanting, and the flicker that Pliny
kindled upon the dying embers of Grecian learning was allowed to go
entirely out.

It was long supposed that Agricola® was the first to make unequiv-
ocal mention of petrified wood, but a passage has been found in Al-
bertus Magnus, Which leaves no doubt that his attention had been
definitely drawn to this subject, and which carries it back to the thirteenth
century. This passage, however, seems to have attracted no attention,
and it was only after Agricola had twice*” expressed his views on the
subject that other writers took it up. Matthiolus in his letter to Bauhin
(1564), and Gesner®™ (1565), described specimens .which came into their
possession. A long discussion followed as to the true nature of these
petrifactions and all kinds of theories were put forward. Already for

54Histuire des végétaux fossiles, Tome I, p. 1.

*Georgius Bauer Agricola. De natura fossilium, 1558, Lib. VII, pp. 324, 328.

56“ Similiter autem ligna jacentia in quibusdam aquis et maribus convertunt in
lapides et retinent figuram lignoruam. Et aliquando nate plants in aquis et mari-
bus illis ita sunt vicine lapidum naturis quod ad modicum exiccate in aére, lapi-
dum formam assumunt,” etc. (Beati Alberti Magni De mineralibus. Tractatus L
Caput VII. Opera, Tom. II, p. 216, Lugduni, 1651.)

57“ De ortu et causis subterraneorum. Lib. III. In De re metallica, Basilesw, 1657,
p. 507. Arbores * * * lapidescunt * * * tum gic in saxa commutate, ut
suus cujuscunque; truncus et rami mox sub aspectum veniant: eortex a ligno non
difficiliter internoscantur.”

5Conrad Gesner: De rerum fossilium, lapidum, et gemmarum maxime figuris et
similitudinibus. Tiguri, 1565. (See cap. ix, fol. 125, f. 1.)

WARD.) KNOWLEDGE OF THE MIDDLE AGES. 389

centuries had the discussion of petrifactions in general been raging and
the discovery of petrified wood only added new complications to an old
controversy. Enlarging upon Aristotle’s doctrine of spontaneous gen-
eration, the scholastic writers had affirmed that it was as possible for
stones of any required form to produce themselves as for living animals
and plants. Avicenna in the tenth century had proposed his vis lapi-
difica, and Albertus Magnus in the thirteenth his virtus formativa.
Bauhin® predicated a spirit of the Universe, or Archeus, while Liba-
vius ® held that fossils sprang, like living things, from a true germ or
seed. Balthasar Klein obtained a specimen, one side of which was
stone, the other coal, and this excited intense curiosity. He sent the
specimen to Matthiolus, who studied it and came to the conclusion®
that coal was the third or final step in the process of transmutation,
and that just as wood turned into stone so stone in turn was transformed
into coal. Klein’s own views were much more rational. The discovery
in the mines of Joachimsthal of a petrified trunk with the bark on
added to the interest already aroused on this subject and kept alive the
discussion.

Thus far only petrified wood had been observed or considered, and
although Johannes Kentmann,” in 1565, had given an account of some
ieaf impressions formed by incrustations of tufa, no mention of the re-
mains of the foliar organs of plants in any true rock formation seems to
have been made until 1664, when Johann Daniel Major published at Jena
his “ Lithologia curiosa, sive de animalibus et plantis in lapides versis.”
This work was so little known that whatever its merits it attracted no
notice, and the subject of fossil plants in the sense now commonly under-
stood remained practically untouched until the close of the seventeenth
century.

In 1699 appeared at London Lhwyd’s “ Lithophylacii britannici Ich-
nographia,” “in which were not only described but figured with suf-
ficient fidelity for identification a number of ferus from the coal meas-
ures of England. <A period of great activity in this department of hu-
man observation, we can scarcely say science, followed the appearance
of this work, but before attempting to follow the development from
this point we may pause a moment to consider the history and progress
of ideas which in all ages so largely formed the spur to observation and
investigation.

With the discovery of fossilized leaves and fronds by Major and
Lhwyd all the departments of paleontology had been opened to dis.
cussion, and in those early days discussion was the primary consid-

59 De fontibus et balneis Bollensis.

60 Hist. et invest. font. medic. ad Tubarin snub Rotembergo. P. III, Franc. ad Menum.

61 Epistole ad Bauhin, III, pp. 141, 142, 1564.

6 Nomenciatura rerum fossilium, etc. Tit. vi, Lapides. Tiguri, 1565, fol. 38.

6 Eduardi Luidii Lithophylacii britannici ichnographia, sive lapidum aliorumque
fossilium britannicorum singulari figura insignium * * * distributio classica.
Londini et Lipsiw, 1699. 8°. (See Tab. 4 & 5, Figs. 184%, 186, 188, 189, 190, 191, 197;
see, ‘also, two Annularias, Figs. 201 & 202, Tab. 5.)

390 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

eration. The end was then, as now with modern science, the ascertain-
ment of truth, but the lesson had not yet been learned that to this end
the accumulation and investigation of facts is the first and principal
requisite.

The mystic views of Avicenna, Albertus, Bauhin, Matthiolus, and
Libavius, already referred to, prevailed in varying forms throughout
the seventeenth century. Sperling“ (1657) advocated a stone-making
spirit, or aura seminalis, Kircher® (1665) propounded his theory of
seminaria of corpuscula salina as the true principle of petrifaction, and
as really constituting the vis lapidifica or spiritus architectonicus which
controls the action of the succus petrificus, or petrifying juice, in which
he was followed more or less closely by Lachmund® (1669), Plot (1677),
Rhin® (1682), and Lhwyd® (1699), while others considered fossils as
mere freaks of nature. Indeed, Camerarius”™ (1712) declared that in
the beginning God had supplied these varied forms to the earth’s inte-
rior the same as grass and herbage to its surface. This class of ideas,
however, could with difficulty withstand the light of the accumulating
facts after the commencement of the eighteenth century, and Lange’s”!
attempt (1708) to demonstrate the germ theory proved one of the latest
efforts of the kind. A modified Democritism, however, cropped out
later, as seen in Dr. Arnold’s (1733) investigation of the origin and
formation of fossils, in which he postulated the existence of infinitesi-
mal particles which were brought together in the creation of the world
to form the outline of all the creatures and objects upon and within the
earth, a work which found some favor on the continent and was trans-
lated into German in 1733.”

The theory which was destined to supplant these vague, unreal spec-
ulations and to prevail throughout the eighteenth century was what
may be called the fiood theory, viz., the idea that all or nearly all fos-
sils consist of the débris of the life of the globe prior to the occurrence
of the Noachian deluge, having been tossed and washed about in that
great disturbance and then left stranded on or near the surface in the
places where they now occur after the waters had retreated. This view
mInay seem to us a poor substitute even for the worthless dreams which

John Sperling. Lithologia, quam sub preside viri, ete., examini submittit G.
E. Wiegandus. Viteb., 1657.

* Athanasius Kircherus, Mundus subterraneus, Tom. I, Lib. VIII, Sect. I, Cap.
Ill; Sect. II, Cap. I. Amsterdam, 1665.

6 Friederich Lachmund. Oryctographia Hildesheimensis. Hildesheim, 1669.

“Robert Plot. Natural History of Oxfordshire, pp. 32, 33, 122, 124. Oxford, 1677.

“Lucas Rhin. Dissertatio de ebore fossili. Altdorf, 1682.

“?Edward Lhwyd. Loe. cit

“Elias Camerarius. Dissertationes taurinenses physico-medice, Franef., 1712.

"Carolus Nicolaus Langius. Alistoria lapidiam figuratorum Helvetiex, p. 165.
Venetiis, 1708, 4°.

Theodore Arnold. Eine Untersuchung des Ursprungs und der Formirung derer
Fossilien. Leipzig, 1733. 8°. I know this paper only from «a mention of it by
Schultze in his “ Kriuterabdriicke im Steinreiche,” 8. 10.

WARD.] THE FLOOD THEORY. 391

had to make way for it, but when philosophically viewed it will be seen
that it was really a decided advance upon those. This is clear when
we remember that it involves the admission that the petrified forms
represent true living forms that once inhabited the earth, which in so
far is a scientific truth not embodied in any of the hypotheses thus far
considered. He who reads the discussion of those times cannot fail to
observe that it bears the stamp of all progressive controversy, in which
a more realistic conception is confronting and overthrowing older ideal-
istic ones.

The first intimation that remains of the Flood might be looked for
seems to have come from Martin Luther, who in his commentary on the
book of Genesis said he had no doubt that surviving indications of the
Deluge might be found in the form of wood hardened into stone around
the mines and smelting mills. Alexander ab Alexandro in his ‘‘Gen-
iales dies” (1522), also held this view, and was followed by Agricola
(1546), Matthiolus (1564), Gesner (1565), and Imperatus™ (1599). But
this explanation made little or no headway against the fanciful theories
of the time, and it was not until nearly a century later that the flood-
theory, revived perhaps by a new edition of the work of Alexander ab
Alexandro,” began to be reasserted and to take firm root. Dr. John
Woodward, of London, who was a great collector of fossils, published a
work in 1695 in which he held that all the solid parts of the earth’s
crust were loosened by the Flood and mingled promiscuously in its
waters, and that at its close everything sank back to the surface ac-
cording to its specific gravity, the remains of animals and plants as-
suming the positions in the respective strata in which they are now found
petrified. Lhwyd, also, in the work already cited (1699) and other writ-
ings, gave countenance to this theory, which had thus acquired con-
siderable respectability prior to the opening of the eighteenth century.
But the greatest champion and expounder of thé diluvian hypothesis
was still to come in the person of Johann Jacob Scheuchzer, a brief
sketch of whose life and work has already been given. His great work”
appeared in 1709, in which he severely attacks all other theories and
brings forward a mass of evidence in favor of his own which has proved
of the greatest value to the progress of substantial knowledge and
especially to that of paleobotany. It is not by this really useful and
for its time important and remarkable work that, we fear, the name of

73°¢Und ich zweifele nicht, dass noch von der Siindfluth her ist, dass man an Oer-
tern, da Bergwerck ist, oft Holtz findet, das schier zu Steinen gehirtet ist.” Martin
Luther’s Griindliche und Erbauliche Auslegung des Ersten Buchs Mosis, Halle, 1739,
Band I, col. 176.

7 Ferrante Imperato. Dell’ historia naturale. Napoli, 1590.

7% Alexander ab Alexandro. Genialium Dierum, librivi. Parisiis, 1539, Lib.v, Caput
ix, fol. 120.

% John Woodward. An essay towards a natural history of the earth and terrestrial
bodies. London, 1695. (See pp. 74 et seq.)

77 Johann Jacob Scheuchzer. Herbarium diluvianum. Tiguri, 1709.

Missing Page

Missing Page

394 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

(1665), Merret ® (1667), Steno (1669), Wedel” (1672), Boccone ® (1674),
Lister ® (1678), Leibnitz 1° (1693), Tenzel (1694), in the seventeenth ;
Carl ! (1704), Rosinus ! (1719), Kundmann ™ (1737), Schultze ' (1755),
Parsons 1 (1757), Blumenbach ! (1780), in the eighteenth century, and
numerous others, recognized in one form or another the real character of
the fossils they were dealing with, some comparing them with living ani-
mals and plants, and some, especially in the later years, boldly combat-
ing the vagaries and supernatural explanations of the dominant schools.
Most of these writers investigated the specimens themselves and drew
their conclusions fresh from them, and in not a few cases the amount
of such material in their hands for investigation was considerable.
During the seventeenth century these more rational utterances were
of course without avail, but during the eighteenth they commenced to
make themselves felt with increasing force. The diluvian hypothesis,
as already remarked, was an advance toward the true conception, and
the question now turned upon the manner in which these petrified re-
mains of once living things could have been placed where they were
found. Kundmann and Schulze were among the boldest, and Morand!

‘Christopher Merret. Pinax rerum naturalium Britannicarum, continens vegeta-
bilia, ammalia et fossilia in hac insula reperta inchoatus. London, 1666 & 1667.

*§ Nicolaus Steno. De solido intra solidum naturaliter contento dissertationis pro-
dromus. Florentie, 1669.

“G@. W. Wedel. De conchis saxatilibus. Ephemerid. Naturz Curiosorum, 1672.
IIT, pp. 101-103, Pl. LXX. Lipsiz et Franef., 1681.

*8Paul Boccone. Recherches et observations naturelles touchant le corail, etc.,
Amsterdam, 1674.

® Martin Lister. Historie animalium tres Anglix tractatus quibus adjectus est
quartus de lapidibus ad cochlearum quandam imagiuem figuratis. London, 1678.
See the ‘‘Prefatio” to this fourth treatise, in which, while favoring a terrigenous
origin, he admits that if real animals they have now ceased to be generated. P. 199.

Idem. Synopsis methodica conchyliorum. 1685.

Idem, A description of stones figured like plants, and by some observing men
esteemed to be plants petrified. Phil. Trans, London, 1673, Vol. VIII, No. 100, pp
6181-6191. PI. 1.

0G. W. Leibnitz. Acta erudita. Lipsiew, 1693. P. 40.

‘1 W, E. Tenzel. Epistola ad Magliabechum de sceleto elephantino Tonne puper
effosse. Jena, 1694.

1 Samuel Carl. Lapis Lydius philosophicus pyrotechnicus ad ossium fossilium
docimasiam analytice demonstrandum adhibitus, ete. Franc. ad Menam, 1704.

1 Michael Reinhold Rosinus. Tentaminis de lithozois ac lithophytis, olim marinis,
jam vero subterraneis, prodromus, etc. Hamburg, 1719.

iJ. C. Kundmann. Rariora natura et artis, oder Seltenheiten der Natur und
Kunst des Kundmannscher Naturalienkabinets. Breslau u. Leipzig, 1737. I. Ab-
schnitt, 14. Artickel.

106 Ch. Fr. Schultze. Kurtze Betrachtung derer Kriuterabdrticke im Steinreiche.
Dresden und Leipzig, 1755, S. 10.

106 James Parsons. An account of some fossils, fruits, and other bodies found in
the island of Shepey. Phil. Trans., 1757, Vol. 50, pt. 2, p. 396,

7 Johann Friedrich Blumenbach. Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. Géttingen
1779-1780. 6. Aufl. 1799. Theil II, § 222, 225, (See especially pp. 688-708, ed. 1799.)

* J. F.C, Morand. Die Kunst auf Steinkohlen zu bauen. Leipzig u. Kinigs-
berg, 1771, 4°. (Translated from the French.)

WARD.) VIEWS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 395

(1771), Bauder ' (1772), and Suckow “ (1782), wrote treatises in the
true scientific spirit. But to Blumenbach is generally ascribed the
credit of having fairly broken the spell and prepared the way for a
science of paleontology. Not only in his “Handbuch” already men-
tioned, but also throughout his later “ Beitrige” !" which began in 1790,
and his other works, he taught with authority that the beings to whose
former existence these fossil forms were due were not only antediluvian
but preadamitic, and that moreover there had been a series of faunas
and floras inhabiting the earth before the age of man.

The revolution, however, was not instantaneous nor abrupt. It had
been preparing for many years and could not have been much longer
postponed. To understand the nature of this preparation it will be
necessary to consider a few of the questions that came up for discus-
sion and solution during the eighteenth century, and in attempting to
do this we must now confine ourselves exclusively to those presented
by the different forms of fossil vegetation. Without denying the su-
perior importance of the evidence from animal remains, it may still be
possible to vindicate the truth of the rather paradoxical statement of
Brongniart that the vegetable kingdom should perhaps claim the honor
of having caused the ridiculous ideas which attributed these remains
of the ancient world to freaks of nature and plastic forces to be aban-
doned. 1?

Among these questions the two that seemed to dwarf all others were,
first, Are these the remains of the same kind of plants that are now
found growing upon the earth? and, second, When did the originals live
that have been preserved in this remarkable manner by turning into
stone ?

When we consider what is now known about the geological strata of
the earth’s crust we can scarcely realize that but two generations ago
comparatively nothing was known on this subject. Geology was not
yet born. The investigators of the last century were really not dis-
cussing the geologic age of fossil remains. The assumption was uni-
versal that these were plants that grew somewhere in the world only a
few thousand years ago at most, plants such as either grew then in the
countries where their remains were found or in other countries from
which they had been brought by one agency or another, generally that
of the Flood, or else, as some finally conceived, had been destroyed by
these agencies, so as to have no exact living representatives. The
writers of that period were therefore more or less divided among these
three theories which we may respectively call (1) the indigenous theory,

109 F, Fr, Bauder. Nachrict von den seit einigen Jahren zu Altdorf von ihm ent-
deckten versteinerten Kérpern. Jena, 1772.

110 Georg Adolph Suckow. Beschreibung einiger merkwtirdigen Abdriickevon der
Art der sogenanten Calamiten. Hist. et comment. Acad. elector. Theodoro-Palatina,
Tom. V, Physicum Monheimii, 1784, p. 355.

11 Beitrage zur Naturgeschichte. 1790-1811.

12 Histoire des végétaux fossiles, Tome I,p. 2.

396 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

(2) the exotic theory, and (3) the extermination theory. The most of
them, however, admitted two or more of these explanations to account
for different facts which could not be brought under a single one.

Scheuchzer, the great apostle of the Flood theory, considered the fos-
sils as ordinary plants still to be found, and he gave them names taken
from the standard botanical works, with all of which he was familiar,
as well as with the flora of Switzerland, the Alps, and Europe in gen-
eral. In the “editio novissima” of his ‘Herbarium diluvianum,” 1723,
he attempted in an appendix to arrange them all according to the sys-
tem of Tournefort. Among the genera which he confidently puts down
are found Gallium (= Galium), Fragaria, Fumaria, Osmunda, Saxifraga,
Sorbus, Trifolium, Vitis, etc., and he occasionally ventures to give the
species, as Populus nigra. Volkmann, in his “Silesia subterranea”
(1720), is not less certain that he sees in one impression the myrrh of
the Scriptures, and in another the common Hippuris, or mare’s-tail.
Lange" (1742) and Moering"* (1748) were satisfied with the faintest
resemblances to living plants, while Lehmann! (1756) labored hard to
prove that the impressions of Annularia sphenophylloides, which occur
at different depths in the coal mines near Ihlefeld, Hohenstein, were
flowers of Aster montanus (A. Amellus or A. Sibiricus) caught in full
bloom and petrified in situ. Many others?!® preceded Walch, who was
himself unable to free himself from the popular conceptions. He com-
pared his Lithophytes with indigenous plants, from which he also de-
rived certain supposed fossil flowers.

The exotic theory, though equally untrue with the indigenous theory,
marked a decided advance, since it was the outcome of careful study,
and a supposed escape from some of the objections to the other mode
of explanation. Very early.in the century certain authors had been
led by curiosity or some other motive to compare the finest of these im-
pressions with specimens of living plants, then already well represented
in European herbariums, from many distant countries. The earliest case
of this kind on record is that of Leibnitz, who in 1706 furnished a note !7
on the oecurrence of impressions of supposed Indian plants in Germany,
@ conclusion which he arrived at from a comparison of fossils with liv-
ing species from India, and believed them to agree. Twelve years

Nicolaus Langius. Deschisto ejus indole atque genesi meditationes cum descrip-
tione duorum vegetabilium rariorum, ete. Acta Acad. nat. cur., Tom. VI. App., p.
133, tab. IT.

Paul Gerard Moering. Phytolithus zee Linni in schisto nigro. Acta Acad.
nat. cur., Tom, VIII, p. 448,

néJ.G. Lehmann. Dissertation sur les fleurs de ]’Aster montanus, ou pyrénaique
précoce a fleurs bleues et & feuilles de saule, empreintes sur l’ardoise. Hist. de Tacad.
des sci. et de belles lettres de Berlin, 1756, pp. 127-144.

u6C. F, Schultze. Die bei Zwickau gefundenen Kriuterabdriicke. Neue gesell-
echaftl. Krziblungen, 1758. Theil I, pp. 42-48.

P. F. Davila, Catalogue systématique et raisonné des curiosités de la nature et de
Yart. Paris, 1767. See Tome TIL, pp. 237-254, Pl. VI, VII, VILL.

47 Histoire des sciences, Paris, 1706, pp. 9-11.

WARD. ]} VIEWS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 397

later Antoine de Jussieu published his celebrated memoir upon the
coal plants of Saint Chaumont, in which he discussed the differences
between them and European ferns and their resemblance to those of
the tropics.

The idea of the tropical facies of fossil plants was thenceforward fre-
quently put forth, as by Lesser" (1735), Capeller ” (1740), Sauvages
(1743), ete. Parsons!” (1757) declared that some of the petrified fruits
found on the Island of Sheppey were “ absolutely exotics,” and Dulac”
(1765) discovered in the coal mines of Saint Etienne, now so carefully
explored by Grand’ Eury, impressions which he likened to American
ferns. Walch leaned toward the exotic theory, and declared that so
imperfect were the remains that their true identity could not be made
out, and that the tendency had been too much to imagine indigenous
species to exist where they were in reality foreign ones. He pointed
out the fact that the fossil plants of England, France, and Germany
were substantially the same, which is not the case to any such extent
with the living floras, and even where no similarity with living plants
could be traced he had no better explanation than that they must be-
long to unknown exotic species.

As intermediate between the exotic theory, or that of transportation
by the Flood, and the extermination theory, or that of destruction by
the Flood, and as, to some extent, an initial stage of the latter, there
was called in a degeneration theory, which Volkmann™ sets forth as
clearly as it was probably ever conceived by any of the contemporary
writers, which certainly is not saying a great deal. According to this
theory the antediluvian vegetation was of a far higher order than that
of postdiluvian origin, and contained none of the thorns, thistles, and
other scourges with which we are familiar. It also contained many
useful and wholesome fruit-bearing trees, of which our modern forests
are the degenerate representatives. Ideas like these were frequently
expressed, and even Buffon entertained some notion of a state of faunal
and floral degeneration.

8 Examen des causes des impressions des plantes marquées sur certaines pierres
des environs de Saint Chaumont. Mém. de l’acad. royale des sciences. Paris, 1718,
p. 287. Itisremarkable that both Brongniart (Hist. des vég. foss., Tome I, p. 3) and
Schimper (Traité de pal. vég., Tome I, p. 4) should have committed the error of credit-
ing this paper to Bernard instead of Antoine de Jussieu. The former would have been
only nineteen years of age; but Brongniart makes the further mistake of assigning
the date as 1708 (loc. cit., foot-note 1), which would have made him only nine years
old. See also a second memoir, loc. cit., 1721.

19 Friedrich Christ. Lesser. Lithotheologie, oder noturhistorische und geistliche
Betrachtung der Steine. Hamburg, 1735, p. 642.

120 Maurus Antonius Capeller. Sciagraphia lithologica. Gedani, 1740, p. 6.

121 T/Abbé de Sauvages. Sur différentes pétrifications,etc. Mém. de l’acad. roy.
des sciences. 1743, p. 415.

122 James Parsons. Philosophical Transactions. 1757, Vol. L, p. 397.

123 Alleon Dulac. Mémoire pour servir 4 histoire naturelle des provinces de Lyon-
nois, Forez, et Beaujolois. Lyon, 1765. Tome II.

124 Silesia subterranea, p. 92.

398 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

The conception of a gradual degeneration would be logically followed
with that of complete extinction, but, so far as we know, the latter
view found expression earlier than the former. Leibnitz, in the memoir
already cited (1706), speaks of the proofs of great physical changes tak-
ing place on the surface of the earth. Both Scheuchzer and Mylius
admitted that many kinds of living creatures may have been utterly
exterminated by the Flood. Jussieu proposed extinction as an alterna-
tive explanation. Rosinus! (1719) stated that among fossil Encrinites
and Belemnites there were some whose originals were unknown. Volk-
mann and the other theological expounders believed in diluvian exter-
mination, and thus explained the facts known to them that fossil trunks
are often found on barren islands where no trees ever grew.” Walch
admitted very little in this fertile direction, although he regarded the
Calamite as the remains of great reeds which had no known living rep-
resentatives. Suckow, however, in the memoir already referred to,
where he was the first to recognize the affinity of the Calamite with
Equisetum, decided, after careful comparison with E. gigantewm and
other large living species, that they probably belonged to extinct
species.

The idea that the fossil remains might represent extinct species of
forms once indigenous to Europe now began to take shape and to work
a profound revolution in prevailing theories. The question then, re-
ferred to a few pages back, as to the time when the originals must have
been living, became oue of paramount importance and led to the investi-
gation of the stratified rocks. This was the origin of true paleontolog-
ical research. But it could searcely have been begun earlier. Strati-
graphical geology was also at the same moment in the act of being born.
Werner had founded his Neptunian theory, and Hutton his Plutonian,
while William Smith was teaching how to determine the age of rocks
by the fossils they contain.

The puerile speculations about the nature of fossils which we have
been considering can be better excused when we remember that nothing
whatever was known of the earth. So long as it was supposed to be
only a few thoasand years old, and as the only disturbance of which
men had ever heard was that of the Mosaic deluge, we may well
doubt whether the most astute of our present geologists would have
conceived any better explanations. In this respect the Ancients had
the advantage. Even Pythagoras is said to have taught that the land
was once under the sea. Xenophanes and Herodotus both expressed
this same idea, and Aristotle himself is known to have entertained
something like an adequate conception of time limits.27 Tertullian
(supra, p. 386, note 49) uttered the last faint echo of this thought,
which thenceforward seems to have slumbered until the middle of

1% Supra, p. 394, note 103.
1%6'Volkmann. Silesia subterranea, p. 93.
27 Meteorologicorum, Lib. I, Cap. XIV, 31; Lib. II.

WARD.] THE SCIENTIFIC PERIOD. 399

the fifteenth century,.when Leonardo da Vinci revived it, attacked
the current scholastic doctrines, and maintained that the fossils which
had been the subject of so much interest in Italy had been living
creatures and had once lived in the sea. A century later Sarayna,
as we have seen, asserted the organic origin of the Veronese petri-
factions, and Fracastorius explained the fossils of the Kircherian,
Moscardan, and Calceolarian Museums by assuming that the moun-
tains containing them had stood in the water during the time the
animals lived, and that these had left their remains on the retreat
of the waters. These and all similar voices were, however, drowned
amid the angry and senseless discussions of the time. Nicholas Steno,
towards the end of the seventeenth century, in a work to which atten-
tion has already been called (supra, p. 394, note 96), recognized the differ-
ent ages of stratified rocks, and asserted that the oldest rocks contained
no fossils. In the posthumous “ Protogea” ”* of Leibnitz, which must
have been written very early in the eighteenth century, a cosmogony is
elaborated which recognizes something like the true process of sedi-
mentation, but is vitiated entirely by an attempt to harmonize it with
the literal six days cosmogony of Moses. Lehmann (1756), whose errors,
so far as his conclusions were concerned, we have already mentioned,
nevertheless performed a truly pioneer work both for geology and for
paleobotany in correctly indicating the relative depth, position, and re-
lations of the different strata with their characteristic vegetable remains
in the coal region at Ihlefeld. These and a few other like treatises
prepared the way for Blumenbach and the sound views which began to
prevail at the close of the eighteenth century. The inadequacy of the
Flood theory to explain the facts and the conviction that there must
have been a series of antecedent revolutions in the floras and faunas of
the globe began to inspire research, and promised the fruitful results
which, in fact, so soon and so richly followed.

2. THE SCIENTIFIC PERIOD.

Having thus rapidly passed in review the long crepuscular period of
speculation, conjecture, and groping research which was necessary to
precede and prepare for the true advent of science—a period through-
out most of which no real science of paleontology could be said to exist,
or, if having aquasi-existence, its zoologic and phytologic branches were
as yet for the most part undifferentiated—the scientific period, which, so
far at least as plants are concerned, literally began with the beginning
of the presentcentury, next claims attention. In the biological sketches
which preceded this historical one the chronologic arrangement was
adopted, and in this, therefore, was necessarily embraced much of the
true history of the science, but, as there stated, this form of treatment

18G, W. Leibnitz. Protogexa, sive de prima facie telluris et antiquissime historie
vestigiis in ipsis nature monumentis dissertatio ; ex schedis manuscriptis viri illustris.
in lucem editaa C. Scheidio. Gottinge,1749. § XLV treats of fossil trees and wood ;
§ XLVI of peat, and § XLVII of the Luneburg fossil trees.

400 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

necessarily leaves out many of the important facts in the history of the
subject. It also fails to connect the principal points into an unbroken
series and to correlate events and discoveries into a systematic whole.
The chiefly chronologic treatment which will now be presented, while
still lacking in philosophic method and otherwise defective, will aim to
supply most of the omissions referred to, and will perhaps be more use-
ful than any other form of treatment which could well be made within
the limited space which can be devoted to it.

The new epoch was auspiciously ushered in on the first year of the
century by the memoir, already once referred to (supra p. 371), of the
Baron von Schlotheim in Hoff’s Magazine, in which he applied the
same reasoning to plants that Blumenbach had done to animals.

Leopold von Buch” (1802) inaugurated the remarkable discussion as
to whether the coal plants actually grew on the spot where they are
found in the carbonized or silicified state, which was continued by Steff-
ens,” Leonhard,"! Noeggerath,’” Sternberg, Brongniart, and Lindley
and Hutton,!* but is by no means settled, and still goes on in France,
England, and the United States. Two papers, by M. Faujas de Saint
Fond, breathing the true scientific spirit of research appeared at about
the same time and attracted much interest.

In 1804 appeared Von Schlotheim’s epoch-making work, “ Flora der
Vorwelt,” as it is now universally quoted, although the author himself
merely entitled it a description of remarkable plant impressions and
petrifactions, a contribution to the flora of the former (or primeval)
world. Tous this seems modest enough, but in view of the history of
paleontology which we have been considering, wemay readily see that this
second part of the title was a bold declaration, and accordingly we find
him defending it in his introduction by these words: “ The petrifactions
which so early engaged the attention of investigators, and which, with-
out doubt, afforded one of the first incentives to the founding of mineral
collections and to the earnest study of mineralogy and geology, have,
as is well known, since Walch began to arrange them systematically,
been for a long time, as well in as outside of Germany, almost wholly

'29 Leopold von Buch. Geognostische Beobachtungen auf Reisen durch Deutschland
und Italien. Band I, Berlin, 1802. 5S. 92.

40 Heinrich Steffens. Geognostisch-geologische Aufsitze. Hamburg, 1810. 8. 267.

1K, C. Von Leonhard. Bedentung und Stand der Mineralogie. Frankfort, 1816.
8. 70, 72.

132 Jacob Noegyerath. Ueber aufrect im Gebirgsgestein eingeschlossene fossile Baum-
stimme und andere Vegetabilien. Historisches und Beobachtung. Bonn, 1819-21.

133 Fossil Flora of Great Britain, Vol. II, pp. xvii, xx, xxii. ;

'34 Barthélemy Faujas de Saint Fond. Description des mines de Turffa des environs
de Bruhl et de Liblar, connues sous la dénomination impropre de mines de terre d’om-
bre, ou terre brune de Cologne. Annales du Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Tome I,
pp. 445-460, avec 2 planches. Paris, 1802, (See Pl. XXIX.)

Idem, Notice sur desplantes fossiles de diverses espdces qu’ on trouve dans les couches
fossiles d’un schiste marneux, recouvert par des laves, dans les environs de Roche-

sauve, département de l’Ardéche. (Loc. cit. Tome II, 1803, pp. 339-344, Pl. LYI et
LVIL)

WARD,] PIONEERS IN PALEOBOTANY. : 401

neglected. They were content to regard them as incontestable proofs
of the Deluge, and closed all further investigation until they were at
last compelled to explain their occurrence through other great natural
operations which had probably been going on earlier and more univer-
sally than the flood described in the Bible, and influencing the forma-
tion of the upper strata of the earth’s crust; and more recent observa-
tions and investigations have even led us to the very probable supposi-
tion that they may be the remains of an earlier so-called pre-adamitic crea-
tion, the originals of which are now no longer to be found. * * * In
the continued investigation of this subject this opinion, with certain
restrictions, has in fact gained a high degree of probability with the
author of the present work, so that he ventures to announce his treatise
as a contribution to the flora of the ancient world ( Vorwelt).”

Since its introduction by Schlotheim this expression, ‘“ Flora der Vor-
welt,” has been applied to nearly all the German works on fossil plants,
and “ Beitriige zur Flora der Vorwelt” still continue to appear. Only
one volume of this work appeared at this time, with fourteen plates; the
completion, owing to political disturbances which so often interrupt the
quiet march of science, was deferred until the year 1820, when the re-
maining plates were published with the first and with those relating to
animal remains as an atlas to his “ Petrefaktenkunde.” !%

Schlotheim worked conscientiously, drew his figures clearly and
weil, and sought diligently in all the European herbaria for forms with
which his fossil plants could be compared. He seriously doubted the
identity of the plant that had always been regarded as the common
Hippuris vulgaris, and concludes that if any of the species he has figured
are still living they must belong to tropical countries..

An important English work, one volume of which is devoted to
vegetable remains, and bears date 1804, or the same as Schlotheim’s
‘‘ Flora der Vorwelt,” has for its title “Organic remains of a former
world,” the last two words of which are a fair translation of the Ger-
man Vorwelt. Dr. Parkinson was a very learned man, and shows that
he was familiar with the continental literature of his subject, but he
nowhere refers to Schlotheim’s work, and may safely be assumed to
have been unacquainted with it.’ The work is written in an erudite
manner, and is fall of historical interest, but as a contribution to science
itis far inferior to that of Schlotheim. The figures, though better than
most of those of the time, are less clear than the German author’s, even
where true leaf-prints and fronds are figured. But they mostly depict
specimens of petrified wood and problematical fruits. Parkinson did

135 See the ‘‘ Petrefaktenkunde,” p. 424.

136 James Parkinson. Organic remains of a Former World. An examination of
the mineralized remains of the vegetables and animals of the antediluvian world ;
generally termed extraneous fossils, Vol. I, containing the Vegetable Kingdom.
London, 1804. 7

137 A remark made by M. Schimper (Traité de pal. vég., Tome I, p. 8) might lead to
the supposition that this work had been written many years later.

GEOL 84 26

402 SKETCIL OF PALEOBOTANY.

not regard it possible to identify the plants. For this work he called
to his aid Dr. James Edward Smith, president of the Linnean Society,
an accomplished botanist, and together they faithfully compared all the
specimens they had. The result was that while a greater or less simi-
larity was detected between different ferns and the living genera Pteris,
Dicksonia, Osmunda, Polypodium, and Adiantum, Dr. Smith was unwill-
ing to say that they actually represented these genera, and he “ conject-
ured that they were all foreign, and productions of a warm climate.”

In the conclusions which he draws from the facts stated in the first
volume of his work, Dr. Parkinson clearly shows that he is still heavily
shackled by the current fallacies relating to the subject he has treated.
The Deluge is still a potent influence aud the “Former World” is not
the modern geologist’s Paleozvic, nor even the “ Vorwelt ” of Schlotheim.

Great activity in this branch of science followed the appearance of
these works. As already shown (supra, p. 371), it was in 1804 that
Count Sternberg began to write, though partly instigated by the papers
of Faujas de Saint Fond, who still continued his investigations.’
Voigt! (1807) discussed the so-called Psarolithes of the Museum Len-
zianum at Jena, and pronounced them fossil polyps, but retracted this
decision the next year, and admitted their vegetable character. Wep-
pen!” (1808) also mentions a number of specimens of petrified wood
from the East Indies, Siberia, and various parts of Europe. This
question was further treated by Steffens,’ Oken in his ‘Lehrbuch
der Naturgeschichte,”™ Hoff,” and Schlotheim. Martin’s “ Petrificata
Derbiensia” | is regarded as a forerunner of future work in Great Britain
on the structure of trunks and on the study of the vegetable remains
of the coal-measures. Schlotheim’s “‘ Beitrage zur Naturgeschichte der
Versteinerungen in geognostischer Hinsicht”! (1813) was an appeal
for greater thoroughness in paleontological research. In 1814 Kieser™®
first pointed out the characteristic structure of coniferous wood which

188 Bemerkungen tiber die von Faujas de St. Fond beschriebenen fossilen Pflanzen.
Botanische Zeitung. No. 4. 29. February, 1804, pp. 48-52.

9 Faujas de Saint Fond. Memoirs in the “Annales du muséum @histoire naturelle”,
Tome VIII, 1806, p. 220; Tome XI, 1808, p. 144; and in the “ Mémoires,” Tome II,
1815, p.444 ; Tome V, 1819, p. 162.

“9 Johann Karl Wilhelm Voigt. Kurze minerogische Bemerkungen. Leonhard’s
Taschenbuch fiir Mineralogie. Erster Jahrgang, pp. 120-124.

“1 Tdem. Loc cit. LGweiter Jahrgang, pp. 385-386.

‘2 J, A. Weppen. Nachricht von einigen besonders merk wiirdigen Versteinerungen
und Fossilien seines Kabinets. Leonhard’s Taschenbuch, Band II, p. 178.

“8 Heinrich Steffens. Handbuch der O1yktognosie, Halle. 1811, Band I, p. 172-186.

4 Th. I, p. 300, 1812.

“6K. E. A. von Hoff. Beschreibung des Trummergebirgs und des iltern Fl6tzge-
birgs, welche den Thiiringen Wald umgeben. Leonh. Taschenb., Band VIII, 1814,
p. 350.

“6 William Martin. Petrificata Derbiensia; or, Figures and descriptions of Petri-
factions collected in Derbyshire. 4to, Wigan, 1809.

“7 Leonhard’s Taschenbuch, Band VII, 1813, p. 1.

148 Dietrich Georg Kieser. Elemente der Phytonomie, oder Grundziige der Anato-
mie der Pflanzen. Jena, 1815. Appendix.

WARD] PIONEERS IN PALEOBOTANY. 403

has had such an important bearing on the study of petrified woods. In
1796 Hagen had published a memoir on the origin of amber, which
was supplemented by Dr. John, of Cologne, in his large work™ on that
substance, discussing it from almost every conceivable point of view.
Relative to the kind of tree that is supposed to have produced the am-
ber he says (p. 168) it is very probable that a species of the genus Pinus
formerly grew in Prussia which, as is the case with many other plants,
is now wholly extinct.

Passing over some less important memoirs we come to that of the
Rev. Henry Steinhauer “On Fossil Reliquia of Unknown Vegetables
in the Coal Strata.”"! Few papers of this period are more often or
approvingly quoted than this. Although presented to an American so-
ciety by one of its members, then a resident of Bethlehem, Pa., it treats
the subject in a thoroughly general way. The author had evidently
spent the greater part of his lifein Great Britain, and was well ac-
quainted with British localities and British fossils. In fact, no mention
whatever is made of any American locality, and the paper would have
been perfectly at home in any of the scientific journals of England.
The remark, therefore, of M. Schimper’ to the effect that Steinhauer
had laid the foundations of vegetable paleontology in America by a
study of the vegetable impressions of the coal-measures of this country,
seems not to be historically accurate. Probably the most important
feature of this able paper is the attempt made in it to classify the veg-
etable remains of the Carboniferous. No special mention has thus far
been made of similar previous attempts by Scheuchzer, Walch, Scloth-
eim, etc., because the more complete treatment of this important subject
is reserved for a future place as an independent and connected study,
and we will not anticipate this branch of our subject here.

Omitting a number of works in which vegetable fossils are either ex-
pressly treated, or least casually referred to, as by Ballenstedt and Krii-
ger,? Raumer,"! Schweigger,! d’Aubuisson de Voisins,’* and Nilsson,"

149K, G. Hagen. De succini ortu. Ueber den Ursprung des Bernsteins. Riga, 1796 ;
see, also, Gilbert’s Annalen, Band XIX, 1805, p. 181.

150 J, F. John. Naturgeschichte des Succins, oder des sogenannten Bernsteins.
Kéln, 1816.

151 Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. Philadelphia, Vol. I, 1818,
p. 265.

182 Traité de Pal. Veg. Tome I, p. 16.

183 J, G. F. Ballenstedt. Die Urwelt. 3. Aufl. Quedlinburg, 1819.

Johan Gottlob Kriiger. Geschichte der Urwelt. Leipzig, 1820, Bd. II, pp. 95-254.

Ballenstedt & Kriiger. Archiv ftir die Entdeckungin der Urwelt. 6 Bde. Qued-
lingburg, 1819-1824.

164 Carl von Raumer. Das Gebirge Niederschlesiens. .. geognostisch dargestellt.
Berlin, 1819, p. 166 (Anmerkungen). ;

196 A, F, Schweigger. Beobachtungen auf naturhistorischen Reisen. Berlin, 1819.

156 D’Aubuisson de Voisins. Traité de Géognosie. 1819, Tome II, pp. 294, 298.

87 Syeno Nilsson. Om Férsteningar och Aftryck af tropiska tridslag, Blad, orm-
bunkar och rérvixter m. m. samt tridkol, funna i ett Sandstenslager i Skane. Kongl.
Vetenskaps Akademiens Handlingar, 1820, pp. 108-122, 278-293.

404 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

which appeared in 1819 or 1820, the last named of which contains the ear-
liest descriptions of the plant remains of the interesting locality of Hor,
in South Sweden, afterward more carefully studied by Brongniart,!*
we find in the year 1820 three treatises of prime importance: Rhode’s
‘‘Pflanzenkunde der Vorwelt,”' Schlotheim’s ‘“ Petrefactenkunde,”
(supra, p. 371), and Sternberg’s “Vlora der Vorwelt” (supra, p. 371).
Rhode studied the coal plants of Silesia, and was the predecessor of
Géppert in that line of work. He discovered the now well-known fact
that thick stems often silicify within while carbonizing without, which
he discussed as well as the questions treated by Schlotheim and his
predecessors relative to the real nature of plant impressions. He fig-
ured Lepidodendron, Sigillaria, and other coal plants, and his plates
are still frequently quoted. Like Lehmann, he mistook certain verticil-
late forms for flowers, but represented them none the less faithfully.
His work was never finished, being interrupted by the premature death
of the author. Sternberg treated the subject of vegetable remains
both from the geognostic and the botanical points of view, and his work
was undoubtedly the most advanced contribution that had been made
up to this date. We have already referred to it in a general way, and
as its chief interest centers upon the system of classification which he
proposed we must defer the more detailed account of it until this sub-
ject is reached. Less than an eighth of Schlotheim’s “ Petrefacten-
kunde” is devoted to plants, but it is systematically arranged, and the
families, genera, and species are named according to the binomial
method of Linneus, giving the work a decidedly modern appearance.
About the only other work referred to in it is his own “Flora der Vor-
welt,” the plates of which are reproduced, and others added. He had
evidently not met with the paper of Steinhauer, and appeared not to
be aware of the labors of Sternberg.

These works gave a new impetus to the science of fossil plants, and
in the following year a number of papers appeared describing discov-
eries in special localities in Germany, France, England,’ and
America. In this year also appeared Adolphe Brongniart’s first and
very important paper on the classification and naming of fossil plants,

18 Annales des Science Naturelles. Tome lV, p. 200. Pl. XI, XII. Paris, 1825.

9 J. G. Rhode. Beitrige zur Pilanzenkunde derVorwelt. Breslau, 1820.

1008.8. von Nau. Pflanzenabdriicke und Versteinerungen aus dem Kohlenwerke
von St. Ingbert im baierischen Rheinkreis verglichen mit lebenden Pflanzen aus
sa Zonen. Denkschr. der kéngl. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Mtinchen, Band VII, 1821,
S. 283.

161 Alexandre Brongniart. Notice sur des végétaux fossiles traversant les couches
du terrain houiller, Annales des Mines, Tome VI, 1821, pp. 359-370.

7®' Thomas Allan, Description of a vegetable impression found in the quarry of
Craigleith. Trans. Roy. Soc., Edinb., Vol. IX, 1823, p. 235.

Patrick Brewster. Description of a fossil tree found at Niteshill, etc. Loe. cit.,
p. 103, Pl. IX.

16 Ebenezer Granger. Notice of vegetable impressions on the rocks connected with
the coal formation of Zanesville, Ohio, Am. Journ. Sci., 1% ser., Vol. III, 1821, p.5.

WARD.] FOUNDERS OF PALEOBOTANY, 405

which has beén quoted already (supra, p. 372), and will receive special
attention farther on.

Four important works appeared in 1822, viz., (1) a memoir by Adolphe
Brongniart, contained in the “Description géologique des environs de
Paris,” by Cuvier and Alex. Brongniart (also in Cuvier’s “Recherches
sur les ossements fossiles,” Tome V, pp. 640-674, 6d. 1835), describing the
fossil plants of the Paris basin; (2) Mantell’s Fossils of the South Downs,
or Illustrations of the Geology of Sussex, in which the plant remains,
though .meager, are mostly dicotyledonous, or fruits of Conifers, ete.
(see Plates VIII and IX and pp. 157 and 262); (3) Martius, “De plantis
nonnullis antediluvanis ope specierum inter tropicos viventium illus-
trandis ;”! and (4) Schlotheim’s “Nachtrag zur Petrefactenkunde,”
which, though chiefly devoted to animal fossils, contains an interesting
chapter on fossil seaweeds.

Brongniart took up the subject of fossil seaweeds, or fucoids, the fol-
lowing year,!® but with the exception of two or three unimportant
papers nothing else appeared in 1823, though research was none the
less active.

Much the same could be said for the year 1824, although the contri-
butions of Buckland, Sir Henry Thomas de la Beche,!* and Dr. Man-
tell? in England, Defrance!® in France, and Nilsson!” in Sweden
added to the stock of knowledge in this department. Sternberg pub-
lished an important memoir in Flora,™ and Martius began his great
work on the palms,’” which has at least proved an aid to paleobotany,
and to which Unger eventually supplied the fossil department.

The year 1825 was characterized in England by an important illus-
trated work by Edmund Tyrell Artis, entitled ‘‘Antediluvian Phytol-
ogy,” which, notwithstanding Brongniart’s criticism,'” and the fact that
most of his species have been obliged to give way, must ever remain
one of the classics of paleobotany, though rather as a work of art than
of science. The author discusses in a very rational manner the progress
of ideas relative to geology, but shows the proximity of his time to the
age of pure discussion by admitting that he had undertaken to prepare
himself to write the work because “convinced of the importance of this

164Denkschriften der kéniglich-baierischen batanischen Gesellschaft in Regensberg,
Band II, 1822, p. 121, Pl. TI-X.

165Mém. de la Soc. d’Hist. Nat., Paris, Tome I, pp. 301-321, Pl. xix-xxi.

166 Trans. Geol. Soc. London, ser. ii, Vol. I, Part I, p. 210.

167 Loc. cit., Pt. II, pp. 45, 162, Pl. VII, Figs. 2, 3.

168 Loc. cit., Part II, p. 421.

169 Jacques Louis Marin Defrance. Tableau des corps orgavisés fossiles, précédé des
remarques sur les pétrifications. Paris, 1824. (See pp. 123, 124, 126.)

17 Kong]. Vetenskaps-Academiens Handlingar, 1824, pp. 143-148, Pl. Il. Stock-
holm, 1824.

in Bd. VII, p. 689.

12 QC, F, Martius. Genera et species palmarum quas in itinere per Brasiliam annis
1817-1820. . . collegit. Monachii, 1824-1849.

173 Hist. des vég. foss., Tome I, p. 6.

406 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

study in affording the materials on which the geologist may found his
theoretical speculations.” The plates are certainly beautiful and also
faithful, and they have been largely drawn upon by later authors. A
second edition of the work appeared in 183°.

Three important papers by Brongniart appeared during the same year
in the “ Annales des sciences naturelles” (Tome IV, pp. 23, 200, 417),
one of which has just been referred to. Sir Alexander Crichton’s me-
moir on the climate of the antediluvian world ‘“ attracted considerable
attention and was copied into several of the scientific journals on the
continent.

During 1826 few results were made known, and the only monograph
of special note that appeared in 1827 was Jaeger’s ‘‘ Pflanzenversteiner-
ungen,”!® which was a praiseworthy effort, and although the illustra-
tions fall below the standard erected by Schlotheim and Artis, the
geognostic treatment has been considered able, and the work is still
quoted.

The year 1828 is without question the most eventful one in the history
of paleobotany, since it saw the issue of Brongniart’s “ Prodrome,” and
the commencement of his ‘‘ Histoire des Végétaux fossiles” (supra,
p. 372), which, taken together as they belong, form the solid basis upon
which the science has since been erected. We will first consider the
“Prodrome,” which merely forms an introduction to the other work, not
asit is, butas it was, designed byitsauthortobe. The “ Histoire” stopped
before the cryptogamic series had been finished, but in the “ Prodrome”
he takes us through the phenogamic series also as he understood it.
Brongniart’s fundamental conception was that fossil plants were not the
less plants, and that so fast as they really became known they should be
placed in their proper position in the vegetable series and made to form
an integral part of the science of botany. In his classification, which
will be given in another place, he therefore had due respect for the
natural system as then understood, but he nevertheless felt that geog-
nostic considerations must be taken into the account, and he saw, with
almost prophetic accuracy, that in passing up through the geologic
series higher and higher forms of vegetable life presented themselves.
This seems simple envugh to us of this age, and might seem trite to the
reader did we not find, several years later, some of the ablest author-
ities both in botany and geology warmly contesting it, as we shall pres-
ently see. Although unable to understand the complete continuity in
the series, as modern evolution requires, and although affected by the
Cuvierian idea of successive destructions and re-creations, still he insisted
that each successive creation was superior to the one it had replaced,
and that there had thus been, as it were, a steady progress from the

4 Alexander Crichton. On the Climate of the Antediluvian World, etc. Annals of
Philosophy, Vol. IX, pp. 97, 207. (See especially pp. 99-102.)

1% Georg Friedrich Jaeger. Ueber die Pflanzenversteinerungen welche in dem Bau-
sandstein von Stuttgart vorkommen. Stuttgart, 1827. (There is an abstract in
French in the Ann. Sci. Nat., Paris, Tome XV, 1828, p. 92.)

WARD.] LABORS OF BRONGNIART. 407

lowest to the highest forms of vegetation. He believed in the gradual
reduction of temperature in the climate of the globe from the earliest
times, and in the purification of the atmosphere from a former excess of
carbonie acid, favorable only to the lower types which then prevailed.
He divided the geologic series into four great periods, the first extending
through the Carboniferous, the second embracing the grés bigarré, or
Buntersandstein, only, the third seeming to include the rest of the Trias,
the Jurassic, and the Cretaceous, and the fourth completing the series.
The table which he gives on page 2% is calculated to show the develop-
ment of the higher types of vegetation in successively higher strata, and
may profitably be compared with the one having the same form, which
will be found below (infra, pp. 440-441). Of this table he remarks that
in the first period there exist hardly anything but Cryptogams, plants
having a more simple structure than that of the following classes. In the
second period the number of the two following classes becomes propor-
tionately greater. During the third period it is the Gymnosperms which
specially predominate. This class of plants may be considered interme-
diate between the Cryptogams and the true Phenogams (Dicotyledons),
which preponderate during the fourth period. The words italicized
in the liberal translation here made are scarcely less than a prophecy,
and one whose fulfillment is only now being tardily granted by system-
atic botanists. In this tabular exhibit Brongniart enumerates 501 spe-
cies of fossil plants known to him, 240 of which belonged to the first period
(Paleozoic), 25 to the second,.72 to the third, and 164 to the fourth. He
also states the number of living species at 50,350. A comparison of
these figures with those of our own time, as given in the table below,
will afford a sort ot measure by which to judge of the nineteenth cen-
tury as an era of scientific discovery.

Brongniart propounded a theory for the primordial distribution of
land vegetation over the globe which is well worth a passing notice, and
is not weakened by modern theories of post-glacial distribution, which
might also be true. His theory, in brief, was that it began on small
islands, the only land then existing ; that these islands became gradu-
ally united and consolidated into continents upon which a different veg-
etation, more varied, and more like the present vegetation could exist,
and he says that it was not until after the formation of the chalk (4. ¢., the
beginning of the Tertiary) that such a continental vegetation seemed
to have appeared. He concludes from this that it was from this period
that large areas of the earth’s surface began to be laid bare, and that
true continents commenced to be formed. He regarded it as remarka-
ble that great changes in both the flora and the fauna of the globe
should have taken place almost simultaneously ; that the age of Cycads
should correspond with that of reptiles and the age of Dicotyledons
with that of mammals (p. 221). But unless fresh discoveries of this
last-named class of animals shall be hereafter made in the middle Cre-
taceous we must regard this second coincidence as now disproved.

/o

408 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

The great work of Brongniart, his “‘ Histoire des Végétaux fossiles,”
proceeds with only a brief historical introduction to the systematic
elaboration of the fossil plants in the order laid down inthe “ Prodrome.”
One entire volume was finished and a second begun without complet-
ing the Cryptogams. Seventy-two quarto pages are all that appear in
the published editions of the second volume, which are devoted to a
thorough discussion of the Lycopodiacese. The first volume is illus-
trated by 166 plates, and 29 accompany the second volume.

Besides these works by Brongniart, which bear date 1828, no less
than five other memoirs from his pen relating to fossil plants appeared
in that year.!% A number of other contributions to vegetable paleon-
tology swell the extraordinarily rich literature of the subject in 1828, only
one of which can be noticed inthis hasty sketch. Thisis Anton Sprengel’s
“¢Commentatio de Psarolithis, lignifossilis genere,” the best treatise on
fossil woods that had thus far appeared. He reviews the history of the
subject from a rational stand-point, gives a systematic classification, and
describes six species of Endogenites, illustrating internal structure in
one plate. The work is a small octavo pamphlet of 42 pages, published
at Halle, in Latin; but for one so unpretentiousit has commanded a high
tribute of respect.

In 1829 Phillips published Part I of his “Geology of Yorkshire,” so
well known to both geologists and paleontologists. Like most English
writers, he was behind the writers of France and Germany in appreciat-
ing the revolution in modes of explanation which the logic of facts had
wrought, and we find him saying (p. 16) that ‘of many important facts
which come under the consideration of geologists the ‘Deluge’ is,
perhaps, the most remarkable; and it is established by such clear and
positive arguments that if any one point of natural history may be con-
sidered as proved, the Deluge must be admitted to have happened, be-
cause it has left full evidence in plain and characteristic effects upon
the surface of the earth.” But he proceeds to qualify this statement by
the admission that organic remains “were certainly deposited in the
rocks before the Deluge.”

He enumerates (pp. 147, 148, 189, 190) and figures (Pl. VII, VIII) a
number of Jurassic fossil plants from what he calls the Upper Sand-
stone, Shale, and Coal, which have formed an interesting chapter in the
history of the Mesozoic flora of the globe. Brongniart’s method of ar-
ranging these vegetable remains is adopted.

Passing over the year 1830, which was characterized by considerable
activity, as evinced by numerous minor papers of Brongniart, Witham,
and others, we will pause to consider the most important work of this
time, which began to appear in quarterly numbers in 1831, viz., “ The
Fossil Flora of Great Britain,” under the happy joint editorship of Dr.
John Tindley; the eminent botanist, and William 2 Hutton, cane equany

thaoasles des sciences naturelles, Vol. XII, Dp. 335, XIV, p. 127, KV, j pp. 43, 225, 435,

WARD. ] LINDLEY AND HUTTON, 409

renowned geologist. This work continued to appear until 1837, when it
was suspended. The whole is now bound in three shapely octavo vol
umes, and forms an indispensable part of the library of every paleo-
botanist. From such an authorship was certainly to be expected a
work of the highest authority and merit, and, indeed, such it really is.
The illustrations are as fine as could be attained for the octavo size,
and the text is both ample and accurate; but the greater part of the
introductory remarks in Volume I, as well as much of the general dis-
cussion throughout the work, is characterized by a most astonishing
and apparently willful ignorance of the true principles of paleophytology
as they were set forth by Brongniart, Sternberg, and even Schlotheim.
One of the most remarkable aberrations of the book is the pertinacity
with which the authors contend for the existence of cactaceous and
euphorbiaceous plants in the coal-measures. It is true that Parkinson!”
had seen a fancied resemblance between certain stems and those of
large cacti, and several similar guesses had been made by early au-
thors,’ who supposed they must find the counterpart of every fossil in
the living flora, but all these imaginings had been long since laid aside
only to be revived by the leading botanist of Europe.

The theory of a former tropical climate in England and temperate
Europe is assailed, the existence of tree ferns in the Carboniferous is
denied, and the relation of Calamites to the Equisetacee doubted, while
to the now somewhat waning doctrine of atmospheric changes “ much
more probability is attached.” The true secret of this sweeping skepti-
cism is, however, not far to seek. It is found in the more general
denial which is finally made of the conclusion to which an admission of
these rejected theories would naturally lead, and had actually led M.
Brongniart and others. The authors say: ‘Of a still more question-
able character is the theory of progressive development, as applied to the
state of vegetation in successive ages * * * in the vegetable king-
dom, it cannot be conceded that any satisfactory evidence has yet been
produced upon the subject; on the contrary, the few data that exist,
appear to prove exactly the contrary.” All the denials and assertions
contrary to Brongniart’s teachings are made to support this view. The
existence of Cactaceze, Euphorbiacex, and other Dicotyledons in the
Carboniferous would negative development; the existence of a former
tropical climate was a strong argument for the nebular hypothesis as well
as for geologic progress; tree-ferns would argue such a former tropical
climate; if Calamites could be shown to be a Juncus (Vol. I, p. xxx), a
higher type would be found in Paleozoic strata and another point gained.
Still another good point was thought to be gained by proving what is
now admitted, that Coniferous plants occur in the coal. All botanists
proper then held, as many still hold, that the Gymnosperms were a

177 Organic Remains, Vol. I, pp. 430, 439, Pl. V, Fig. 8, Pl. IX, Fig. 10.
172Volkmann. Silesia subterranea, p.106; Walch, Naturgeschichte der Versteiner-
ungen, Tab. Xa, Xb, Xe.

410 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

subclass of the Dicotyledons, co-ordinate with the dicotyledonous
Angiosperms. But, curiously enough, Brongniart had forestalled this
argument by making the Gymnosperms of lower type, intermediate be-
tween the Cryptogams and the angiospermous Phanerogams. By a
special insight, characteristic of true scientific genius, he had used their
lower geological position as a partial proof of their lower organization,
i. é., had postulated evolution as an aia to organic research—a method
which is now becoming quite common, although unsafe except in the
hands of a master.

Much stress is laid upon the fact “that no trace of any glumaceous
plant has been met with, even in the latest Tertiary rocks,” the authors
thus freely employirg the fallacy which they elsewhere warn others to
avoid, that because a class of plants has not been found, therefore it
did not exist in a given formation. But to cut off the possibility of a
reply to the position they take they finally declare that, “ supposing
that Sigillarias and Stigmarias could really be shown to be cryptogamic
plants, and that it could be absolutely demonstrated that neither Coni-
fere nor any other dicotyledonous plants existed in the first geological
age of land plants, still the theory of progressive development would
be untenable, because it would be necessary to show that Monocotyle-
dons are inferior in dignity, or, to use a more intelligible expression,
are less perfectly formed than Dicotyledons. So far is this from being
the case that if exact equality of the two classes were not admitted, it
would be a question whether Monocotyledons are not the more highly
organized of the two; whether palms are not of greater dignity than
oaks, and Cerealia than nettles.” Teleologic and anthropocentric reas-
oning like this pervades all the discussions in the work and largely
vitiates the scientific deductions. The elaborate experiment of Dr.
Lindley, described in the first dozen pages of the third volume, was
obviously animated by the same spirit of uncompromising hostility to
the development hypothesis that inspired the vagaries that character-
ize the introduction to the first volume. By showing that the higher
types of plants when long immersed in water are earlier decomposed
than ferns, conifers, and palms, he thought he had demonstrated that
the reason why we find no Dicotyledons in the Carboniferous is simply
because they had not resisted, and from their nature could not resist
the destructive agencies to be overcome in the process of petrifaction.
One could wish that he might look down upon the four thousand species
of fossil Dicotyledons now known, and realize how vain had been his
experiment as well as all his former theorizing.

One work of special interest and value appeared in 1832, “ Die
Dendrolithen iu Beziehung auf ihren inneren Bau,” by C. Bernhard Cotta.
This was a renewed attempt to classify systematically and describe
scientifically the various kinds of fossil wood that had been discovered.
Following in the footsteps of Sprengel, but provided with far more and
better material, Cotta made a special study of the internal structure of

WARD. ] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES. 411

all the trunks and stems in his collection, establishing new genera and
species based thereon, some of which are still accepted, as, é. g., Psar-
onius. He reduces the forms in which all vegetable remains occur to
three general classes, viz., (1) mere impressions without any remnant
of the original cause; (2) petrifactions proper, in which the original
substance is replaced with precision by the particles which were in the
solution in which the plant was immersed; and (3) true vegetable re-
mains whose substance is still present though somewhat metamor-
phosed, as, e¢. g., lignite. This classification may be profitably com-
pared with that of Schultze, in the work which has already been no-
ticed.% His Dendrolithen embrace more than did Sprengel’s Psaro-
lithi, and aimed to include all the objects of this general class with
which he was acquainted.

Witham’s “Internal Structure of Fossil Vegetables” (supra, p. 373),
appeared in 1833, and is the most exhaustive treatise thus far produced
on the histology of paleobotany. He was evidently unacquainted with
Cotta’s “ Dendrolithen,” and, so far as the work itself would indicate, with
Sprengel’s “ De Psarolithis.” He confined his investigations entirely to
British fossils, to which he is able in most cases to apply the systematic
names given by Brongniart and Lindley and Hutton. The classifica-
tion adopted is that of Brongniart. He makes his study comparative,
and devotes two plates to the illustration of the structure of various
kinds of wood of living trees.

One other important work appeared in 1833, viz., Zenker’s “ Beitrige
zur Naturgeschichte der Urwelt,” °° which, while describing animal re-
mains from several localities and horizons, devotes 23 of its 67 pages,
and three of the six plates to the description and illustration of the re-
markable Cretaceous plant beds of Blankenburg in the Harz district.
This memoir is remarkable for being the first attempt systematically to
treat dicotyledonous fossils, and notwithstanding the adverse fate which
has overtaken nearly all the names given at that and earlier periods to
plants of all kinds, Zenker’s genus, Credneria, still stands, and seems
likely to stand much longer, if not perpetually. Though less well
known than the Giningen leaf-prints, this locality was known to Scheuch-
zer, Briickmann, and Walch, but its systematic study as well as the
jnitial step in the investigation of dicotyledonous fossil plants was re-
served for Zenker in the second quarter of the nineteenth century.

The year 1834 would be sufficiently memorable in the annals of paleo-
botany if it had witnessed nothing more than the appearance of the
first memoir * relating to the subject, from the pen of Doctor Heinrich

19 Kurtze Betrachtung derer Kriuterabdriicke im Steinreiche, pp. 7-9.

10 Jonathan Carl Zenker. Beitrige zur Naturgeschichte der Urwelt, etc. Jena,
1833.

481 Jeber die Bestrebungen der Schlesier die Flora der Vorwelt zu erliutern. Schle-
sische Provincialblaitter, August und September, 1834, Also in Karsten und Dechen’s
Archiv, Band VIII, 1835, pp. 232-249.

412 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY

Robert Géppert, of Breslau, whose career we have already briefly
sketched, and whose death since the first draft of that sketch was made
occasioned an unavoidable shock notwithstanding the ripened age which
our biographic notice showed him to have attained (supra, p. 373).

No important works on fossil plants appeared in 1835, and the princi-
pal production of 1836, in this line of research, was Goppert’s “ Systema
Filicum Fossilium,” which had probably been in preparation for
many years. It was a masterly effort and fittingly betokened the great
career of its author. The historical introduction remains the best re-
view of paleobotanical science that has ever been written, and shows that
the literature of the subject had long been a favorite pursuit of Dr.
Géppert. Nearly all the figures of fossil ferns that had been drawn by
the early authors were discussed and identified by the light of more
recent knowledge. Rigid comparisons were instituted between fossil
and living species, and systematic descriptions of the former so far as
then known were introduced. In the forty-four plates that accompany
the work are figured most of the Silesian species, which the author de-
clares to be more numerous than those of any other country.

Géppert’s contributions during the next year (1837) were numerous !
and important, and, taken with the equally valuable ones of Brong-
niart,!™ render this year a good one for their branch of science.

The year 1838 was still more fruitful in published results, as many as
a dozen memoirs having been produced in Europe. One of the most
important of these has already been mentioned!® (supra, p. 380), in
which the first serious attempt was made to determine dicotyledonous
genera by the aid of the nervation of their leaves.

In this year also appeared the eighth number of Sternberg’s “ Flora
der Vorwelt,” containing Corda’s “Skizzen zur vergleichenden Phyto-
tomie vor- und jetztweltlichen Pflanzen,” whose merits have already
been referred to (supra, p. 371).

The year 1839 produced the first contributions of both Geinitz (supra,
p. 374) and Binney, thus adding two important names to the roll of
colaborers in this field. The Count of Miinster’s “ Beitrige zur Petre-

18 Systema Filicum Fossilium: Die Fossilen Farnkriuter. Nov. Act. Acad. Caes,
Leop. Car., Tom. XVII, Suppl., pp. 1-76.

8 Uebersicht der bis jetzt bekannten fossilen Pflanzen. In Germar’s Handbuch
der Mineralogie, 1837.

Idem, Two papers on fossil wood: Neues Jabrbuch fiir Mineralogie, 1837, p. 403,
and Verhandl. d. schles. Gesell., 1837, pp. 68-76; and an important one on the pro-
cess of petrifaction: Poggendorf’s Annalen, Band XLII, 1837, §. 593.

Comptes Rendus, Paris, 1837, Tome V, p. 403; Proc. verb. de la soc. philom.,
1837, p. 99; Mém. de l’Acad. Roy., Tome XVI, 1838, p. 397.

+5 Sul sistema vascolare delle foglie, considerato come carattere distintivo per la
determinazione delle filliti. N. Ann. d. Sc. Nat. Bologna, 1838 Ann. I, Tom. I, pp.
343-390, Pl. VII-XIII.

186 “On a microscopic vegetable skeleton found in peat, near Gainsborough.” Brit-
ish Association Report, 1839 (Part II), pp. 71, 72.

Wanv.] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES. 413

factenkunde” also began to appear in that year, to which several of the
most prominent German paleobotanists contributed.

Three very important works appeared in 1840. Bowerbank’s “ Fos-
sil Fruits and Seeds of the London Clay”+*’ marked a great advance in
the state of knowledge of the remarkable bodies studied by him, and
which, since Parsons called attention to them in 1757, and in fact
for many years previous to that time, had excited the interest of both
the learned and the unlearned. Of these remarkable forms Bowerbank
established ten genera, all but two of which (Hightea and Cucumites)
are accepted by Schimper in his “Traité de paléontologie végétale.”
The number of species distinguished is quite large, and the descrip-
tions and illustrations are very thorough and exact. The work is in-
tensely scientific, and the reader is rarely referred to other authors or
to any of the collateral cireumstances that would have so greatly aided
him in understanding it properly. Exact localities are rarely given,
though the island of Sheppey seems to have furnished a large share of
the specimens. ; #

The work of Steininger,™ treating of the fossil plants of what he
designates as the “ pfalzisch-saarbriickische Steinkohlengebirge,” may
next be mentioned, in which 83 species of coal plants are described,
with 17 illustrations. The work, however, is chiefly geognostic.

Rossmissler’s treatise on the lignitic sandstone about Altsattel in
Bohemia,’ almost marks an epoch in the science of fossil plants from the
resolute, and in many respects, successful manner in which the author
attacks the problem of dicotyledonous leaves, which had thus far been
regarded as beyond the power of science to harmonize with the living
flora. He clearly realized the objections to the use of Sternberg’s uni-
versal genus Phyllites for all plants of this class, and in stating these ob-
jections he says, among other things, that in the great quantity of leaves
that will be distinguished in the course of careful investigations of Ter-
tiary strata the species of this vague genus Phyllites cannot fail to increase
so enormously that all resources for deriving specific names will be ex-
hausted. He first proposed to himself to determine the true genera to
which the leaves seemed to belong, and then to append the old name
phyllites to these genera, as, ¢.g., Leuco-phyllites, Daphno-phyliites, ete. ;
but the fear of responsibility, the comparatively unimportant and local
character of his work, and the advice of friends deterred him from car-

187 James Scott Bowerbank. A History of the Fossil Fruits and Seeds of the London
Clay. London, 1840.

188 James Parsons. An Account of some Fossils and other Bodies found in the Island
of Shepey. Phil. Trans., 1757, Vol. L, pp. 2, 396.

19 J, Steininger. Geognostische Beschreibung des Landes zwischen der unteren
Saar und dem Rheine. Ein Bericht an die Gesellschaft niitzlicher Forschungen zu
Trier. Trier, 1840.

190 &, A. Rossmissler. Beitrige zur Versteinerungskunde. Erstes Heft. Die Ver-
steinerungen des Braunkohlensandsteins, aus der Gegend von Altsattel in BOhmen.
Dresden und Leipzig, 1840.

414 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

rying out his plan and decided him to employ under strong protest the
old name. He described forty-eight Phyllites, all of which are so ad-
mirably figured as regards nervation that it has been no trouble for
later writers to refer them to their proper genera. He also describes a
palm (Flabellaria), several cones of Pinus, and a coniferous stem that
he mistook for Stigmaria, though it is due to him to say that he recog-
nized the entire novelty of finding a Stigmaria in the Tertiary formatiou.

In addition to these and some minor contributions during the year
1840, it was, as already shown, the one in which the earliest papers of
both Unger! aud Schimper™ on fossil plants made their appearance.

The principal contribution made iu 1841 was Géppert’s ‘‘ Gattungen
der Fossilen Pilanzen,”! which appeared originally in six parts, with
German and French text and many plates. It embraces a fundamental
discussion of the existing knowledge of fossil plants. It must not be
supposed that it is confined to the description of generic characters.
The characteristic species of each genus are fully portrayed. The author
still clings to the ancient floras, chiefly to the Carboniferous. The work
has an unfinished appearance, and the parts have been put together by
the publishers in a most slovenly manner, which, however, should not
be allowed to detract from the true merits, as it certainly does from the
usefulness, of this work.

A number of other papers by Géppert must be credited to 1841, the
most important of which was his “ Fossile Flora des Quadersandsteins
von Schlesien,”!* which he supposed to belong to the Tertiary system,
while in connection with Beinert he published in the same year a me-
moir on the distribution of fossil plants in the Carboniferous formation.’

The little work of Alexander Petzholdt, “ De Calamitis et .Lithan-
thracibus ” (Dresde et Lipsia, 1841), possesses merits not to be meas-
ured by its size. It has done much to clear up both subjects, and also
to advance them, and the collection given of opinions which have been
expressed by those best situated to know respecting the nature of the
Calamite, and especially respecting the origin of coal, must continue to

191 Supra, p. 375, note 9.

12 Baumfarne, Schachtelhalme, Cycadeen, Aethophyllum, Albertia * * * im
bunten Sandstein der Vogesen; Hysterium auf einem Pappel-Blatte der Wetterauer
Braunkohle. Lonhard und Bronn’s Neue Jahrbiicher, 1840, pp. 336-338. Communica-
tion dated 14. Mirz, 1840.

18 Die Gattuugen der fossilen Pflanzen verglichen mit denen der Jetztwelt und
durch Abbildungen erlautert (Les genres des plantes fossiles comparés avec ceux du
monde moderne expliqués par des figures). Bonn, I-IV. Lfg., 1841, V-VI. Lfg., 1842-
1845.

194Ueber die fossile Flora der Quadersandsteinformation in Schlesien als erster
Beitrag zur Flora der Tertiirgebilde. Nov. Act. Acad. Ces. Leop. Tom. XXIX, 1841,
p. 97.

1% Goppert & Beinert. Ueber Verbreitung der fossiler Gewiichse in der Steinkohlen-
formation. Karsten & Dechen’s Archiv., Band XV, 1841, p. 731.

WARD.] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES, 415

have great historical value. As much may also be said for still another
book of Petzholdt, published the same year, “De Balano et Calamo-
syringe (Additamente ad Paleologiam).

Although the first number of Unger’s “Chloris Protogea” appeared
in 1841, still the work was not published until six years later, and con-
tains preliminary matter of later origin and of such moment as to ren-
der it more proper to speak of the work as a whole in the chronological
order of its final publication.

In 1842 numerous papers relating to fossil plants appeared in the cur-
rent periodicals by Binney, Gippert, Gutbier, Kutorga, Unger, and
others, all contributing to swell the literature of the science and supply
the data for future generalization. Mr. Williamson’s paper before the
British Association of that year on the origin of coal (supra, p. 376) has
already been referred to as a landmark to indicate the point of time at
which he joined the growing band of workers in this field. Miquel’s
monograph of the Cycadacezx,’® although dealing chiefly in the living
forms, takes account also of the fossil cycads, and forms a contribution
to the subject that was much needed in its day. In Vanuxem’s “ Geol-
ogy of New York,” which forms Part III of the “ Natural History of
New York” (Albany, 1842), occur numerous figures of fossil plants, with
some general remarks thereon.

Some dozen or more memoirs on fossil plants appeared in 1843, the
most important of which were by Roemer!” and Parlatore.!% The first
edition of Morris’s “Catalogue of British Fossils” °° (including fossil
plants) also appeared in that year.

The number of contributions to the science of fossil plants in 1844
was considerably larger than in the previous year. It includes Schim-
per and Mougeot’s ‘‘ Monographie des plantes fossiles du grés bigarré
de la Chaine des Vosges,” a work of considerable importance. In it are
described and figured. species of MWthophyllum, of surprising form and
perfection, also Yuecites and other of the most ancient monocotyledo-
nous types; Albertias, Voltzias, Schizoneuras, and Ferns.

Numerous short papers by Géppert relate to the lignite beds, and
show that he was working up towards the subject of amber inclusions,
which were soon to engross his attention; and one of these relates to
the existence of amber in his own country,” and gives an historical ac-

196}°, A. G. Miquel. Monographia Cycadearum. Trajecti ad Rheum. Fol. cum 8
tab.

197 Friedrich Adolph Roemer. Die Versteinerung des Harzgebirges. Hanover,
1843, 4to. — ;

198 Filippo Parlatore. Intorno ai vegetali fossili di monte Bamboli e di monte Massi.
Atti d. Georgofili d. Firenze, Vol. XXI, pp. 1-83. Firenze, 1843. ;

19 John Morris. A Catalogue of British Fossils, comprising genera and species hith-
erto described with references to their geological distribution and to the localities in
which they have been found. London, 1843. Second edition, considerably enlarged.
London, 1854. ;

200 Tleber das Vorkommen des Bernsteins in Schlesien. Uebersicht d. schles, Gesell.,

1844, S, 228.

416 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

count of its discovery there, with a list of all the localities known to him.
Besides giving a summary of the fossil flora of Silesia, in Wimmer’s
“Flora von Schlesien” (Breslau, 1844), Géppert prepared a laborious
statistical paper” on the condition of the science at that date, which
is highly interesting to consult now. The whole number of species then
known to him was 1,778, of which 927 were vascular Cryptogams and
242 Gymnosperms.

Germar’s great work on the Carboniferous flora of Wettin and Liébe-
jin®” began. to appear in 1844 and continued in -parts until 1853.
Though treating of all the forms of life found in this district, the work
is necessarily devoted mainly to plauts, and the large folio plates display
great thoroughness of treatment. To Dr. Andra is due considerable of
the text. :

Probably no year since 1828 was more fruitful of results in paleo-
botany than 1845, and no year since has exceeded it, if we only speak
relatively to the state of the science. Two of the greatest, American con-

' tributors, Lesquereux *’ and Dawson (supra, p. 377, note 15), entered the

ranks at this point, although their first papers gave little earnest of
their future career. Besides some twenty minor papers and several
small monographs and memoirs of permanent value, we have four large
and important works that were either finished or well begun and fairly
before the public on that year. Upon the first class we have here no
space for comment. Among those of the second may first be mentioned
Kurr’s memoir on the Jurassic flora of Wiirttemberg, 2 in which some
dozen new species of Conifere, ferns, and lower Cryptogams are figured.
His supposed discovery of true dicotyledonous (cupuliferous) wood has
not been verified.

Two papers by Géppert are worthy of mention, one describing fossils
from the coal measures of Siberia, collected by M. P. de Tchihatcheff,
and published by that traveler in his “ Voyage dans l’Altai,”2® with
eleven plates, and one on the fossil flora of the middle Jura of Upper
Silesia,

*01 Ueber den gegenwiirtigen Zustand der Kenntniss fossiler Pflanzen, 1844. Leonh.
u. Bronn’s Neues Jahrbuch, 1845, S. 405,

“Ernst Friedrich Germar. Die Versteinerungen des Steinkohlengebirges von Wet-
tin u. Lébejiin im Saalkreise. (Petrificata stratorum lithanthracum Wettini et Lobe-
juni in cireulo Salsae roperta.) Halle, 1844~53, fol. (Printed in German and Latin).

203“ @uelques recherches sur les marais tourbeux en général.” Mémoires de la
Société des sciences naturelles de Neuchatel, Tome III, 1845.

24 Johann Gottlob Kurr. Beitrige zur fossilen Flora der Juraformation Wirttem-
berg, Stuttgart, 1845 (Kinladungsschrift 2u der Feier des Geburtsfestes Sr. Majestat

Wilhelm von Wiirttemberg in der kénigl. polytechnischen Schule zu Stuttgart den
27. September, 1845).

20 Description des végétaux fossiles recueillis par M. P. de Tchihatcheff en Sibérie,
traduit du manuserit allemand par P. de Tchihatcheff et publié dans son ‘‘ Voyage
scientifique dans ]’Altai Oriental et les parties adjacentes de la frontidre de la Chine,
pages 379 & 390, planches 25 a 35,

> Ueber die fossile Flora der mittleren Juraschichten in Oberschlesien. Uebersicht
der schles, Gesellsch. 1845, p. 139.

WARD.] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES. 417

Adolphe Brongniart named the fossil plants of Murchison’s Geology
of Russia” and published an explanatory letter.

One other paper of the minor class may be mentioned, chiefly because
it describes American material, viz., that of Dr. James Hall in his report
upon the vegetable remains collected by Frémont’s expedition in 1842.28
Eleven species of fossil plants are described in this report, besides the
figure (Pl. II, Fig. 4), and mention of a dicotyledonous leaf, which last
diagnosis is undoubtedly in so far correct. The determination of the
ferns is also correct, except in the case of his Glossopteris Phillipsii
(Pl. II, Figs. 5, 5a, 5b, 5c), which is not a fern but another dicotyledonous
plant, as may be seen by the secondary veins and the absence of the
characteristic forked nervation of Glossopteris. In these and other re-
spects these figures do not agree with those of Brongniart (“‘ Hist. veg.
foss”., Pl. 61, bis Fig. 5) and Phillips (Geol. Yorkshire,” Pt. I, Pl. VIII,
Fig. 8). This is not the place to enter into the diagnosis and state the.
true affinities of these leaves, and indeed from the figures alone this
would be a somewhat hazardous task; as yet only a few of the types
figured are in my hands, and of this species only one of the least per-
fect specimens, but this and other unfigured fragments fully confirm its
reference to the Dicotyledons. Of the geological position of the locality
from which this material was derived one can perhaps speak with
greater certainty. It is at least certain that it is not Oolitic, as Dr. Hall
supposed, and it is probably Cretaceous, perhaps Laramie group. If the
latitude and longitude (lat. 414°, long. 111°) were accurately taken this
would make Muddy Creek a tributary of the Bear River at a point which
is colored as Cretaceous on the new map of the United States Geological
Survey prepared by Mr. W. J. McGee (1884). The report will at least
serve to direct attention to this locality.

Among the larger works that appeared in 1845, we will first mention
Unger’s “ Synopsis Plantarum Fossilium,” which is a carefully-prepared
catalogue of all the fossil plants known to him with references to the
works in which first described. The orders and genera are briefly char-
acterized, and the localities are stated for the species. At the end isa
summary, from which we learn that he had been able to enumerate
1,648 species. This, as will be remembered, is 130 species less than
Géppert had enumerated a year earlier. It probably was, however, a
closer approximation to the true state of the science. A complete index
and a good bibliography rendered the work convenient for reference,
and we can readily imagine its extreme usefulness at that date.

Probably the most important work of this year was Corda’s “ Flora

2%7Geologie de la Russie d’Europe et des montagnes de l’Oural, par Roderick Impey
Murchison, Edouard de Verneuil, et le Comte Alexandre de Keyserling. Londres et
Paris, 1845, Tome II, pp. 1-13. ;

208 Report of the Exploring Expedition tothe Rocky Mountains in the year 1842, and to
Oregon and North California in the years 184344. By Capt. J. C. Frémont, Wash-
ington, 1845, pp. 304-307, plates I and II.

GEOL 84——27

418 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

der Vorwelt.”2 It is a large work in folio, with 128 pages of text and
sixty magnificent plates, chiefly devoted to the illustration of the inter-
nal structure of petrified and carbonized trunks in various families of
the vegetable kingdom and at different geological horizons, but mainly
in the Carboniferous. As the only considerable work on this subject
since Witham’s (supra, p. 373), it was as much superior to that work as
the aids to research were greater than they had been twelve years ear-
lier.

In the same year also appeared Reuss’s “‘ Versteinerungen der béhm-
ischen Kreideformation,” to which Corda contributed the fossil plants
in a chapter of sixteen quarto pages, with six plates executed with the
same care and thoroughness that is characteristic of all his work.

One other masterly production, viz., Gdppert’s Amber-Flora, in Ber-
endt’s great work on amber,” will conclude the enumeration for the year
1845. His prolonged investigations into the lignite beds of Europe and
his study of the amber found in Silesia naturally led to this broader un-
dertdaking and fittingly prepared him for it. He begins with a chapter
on the amber tree. Of this he remarks that the pieces of wood that
occur in and along with amber bear so close a resemblance to the spe-
cimens of lignite in his collection, that he does not for a moment hesi-
tate, at least provisionally, to express the opinion that the amber of Prus-
sia is probably derived from one species, which, from its similarity to
the Coniferse of the present epoch, he refers to the extinct genus Pinites,
and which he designates as Pinites succinifer, and fully characterized
in the systematic part of the work. This follows, beginning with a list
of the species thus far found in amber, of which he enumerates fifty-
three. He finds six other species of Pinites and twenty of Conifer.
There are ten cellular plants (chiefly mosses and Hepaticz), one fern,
one gnetaceous species (Ephedrites), and twenty-one true Dicotyledons.
The descriptions come next, and are accompanied by appropriate and

very elaborate illustrations.
Very little idea of the true geologic age of these fossils is derivable

from any of the statements contained in this work, either by Géppert or
Berendt, and it is still quite the practice to refer these forms to the
amber simply, without further attempt to fix their position. Butina
paper read before the Silesian Society, May 11, 1853, Dr. Géppert ex-
pressed himself very clearly on this point. He said: “The manner in
which this flora is composed, as well as the complete absence of one
tropical or even subtropical form, points to the modern age of the amber
formation, which we must unquestionably refer to the latest strata of
the Tertiary formation, to the Pliocene division.”2" By this time the

*” Beitriige zur Flora der Vorwelt, von August Joseph Corda, mit sechszig Tafeln
Abbildungen. Prag., 1845.

0 Georg Carl Berendt. Die im Bernstein befindlichen organischen Reste der Vor-
welt. Erster Band, Berlin, 1845. I. Abtheilung: Der Bernstein und die in ihm be-
findlichen Paanzenreste der Vorwelt (chiefly by Géppert).

* Jahresbericht d. Schles, Gesellschaft fir vaterlandische Cultur, 1853 (Breslau,
1854), pp. 46-62, (see p. 373).

WARD.] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES, 419

amber flora had greatly increased, and 163 species are enumerated in
this paper. This result was, however, in the main achieved through
the indefatigable labors of Dr. Géppert. °

In strong contrast with 1845 stands the next year, at least as regards
the importance of the works produced relating to fossil plants. Dunker’s
monograph of the Wealden?” is perhaps the leading contribution of
1846, and this embraces all departments of paleontology for that group.
But the plants form a prominent feature. Fifty species of Wealden
plants are enumerated as having been thus far found in Germany and
England, nearly all of which are described and figured. In this last
respect Dunker’s work is all of a high order, which is nowhere more
strongly displayed than in the treatise under consideration.

Géppert’s papers were numerous in 1846, and at least one “ Ueber die
fossile Flora der Grauwacke oder des Uebergangsgebirges”,”" contained
the germ of one of his future great works.?4

Heer** and Bunbury (supra, p. 379, note 19) both commenced in 1846
to write on fossil plants.

The only great work devoted to paleobotany that appeared in 1847
was Unger’s “Chloris Protogea,””* which, as already stated, was pub-
lished in ten numbers, the first of which came out in 1841. In the course
of the preparation of these numbers his “Synopsis plantarum fossilium”
appeared, which we have already noticed. The entire matter of this
little work was introduced bodily, and apparently unchanged, into the
larger one, forming its second part. The first part, or introduction, is
entitled “Skizzen einer Geschichte der Vegetation der Erde.” This is
an able discussion of the leading problems as they presented them-
selves at that time and went far toward the solution of some of them.
The body of the work is strictly descriptive, and here we find 120 species
characterized, all new to science or consisting of corrected determina-
tions of other authors. What specially distinguishes this work, how-
ever, from all that have thus far been reviewed is the very large percent-
age of dicotyledonous species, mostly from Parschlug, embraced in these
descriptions. Considerably over one-half of the number belong to this
subclass and to such genera as Ulmus, Alnus, Betula, Quercus, Acer,
Rhus, Platanus, Ceanothus, Rhamnuus, ete. He seems to have reached
his determinations of these genera by an intuitive perception of the
general and special resemblances of the fossil to the living leaves, with

2\2 Wilhelm Dunker. Monographie der Norddeutschen Wealdenbildung. Ein Beit-
rag zur Geognosie und Naturgeschichte der Vorwelt. Braunschweig, 1846.

213Jebersicht der Arbeiten der schlesien Gesellschaft, 1846, pp. 178-184 (expanded
in the Zeitschrift d. deutsch. geol. Gesellsch. Band III, 1851, 8. 185).

214Fossile Flora des Uebergangsgebirges, Nov. Act. Acad. Caes. Leop. Car. Nat. Cur.
Band XXII, Suppl. Breslau & Bonn, 1852.

25 The first paper of which we have a record is the one “Ueber die von ihm an der
hohen Rhone entdekten fossilen Pflanzen,” which appeared in the Verhandlungen der
schweizerischen Gesellschaft for 1846, pp. 35-38. _

16Franz Unger. Chloris Protogea. Beitrage zur Flora der Vorwelt. Leipzig, 1847,

420 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

which, as a thorough botanist, he was perfectly familiar. He nowhere
refers to any treatise on the nervation of leaves, and as those of Bianconi
(supra, p. 380, note 27) are not included in his “Literatura nostri evi,”
it is probably safe to infer that he was unacquainted with them. In
drawing his figures he adopted the old method of figuring the stone
as well as all the defects in the impression, which while requiring an
immense amount of unprofitable labor, rendered the result much less
clear and less valuable than it would have been had these features been
omitted. The fifty plates, however, by which this work is illustrated
constitute an enduring monument to the skill, energy, and industry of
their author.

Pomel’s paper on the Jurassic flora of France,” which appeared in the
official report of the association of German naturalists and physicians
for 1847, though unaccompanied by illustrations, proved a highly im-
portant contribution and gave a new impetus to the study of that
formation from the vegetable side.

Some dozen or more other memoirs of greater or less import were
contributed during 1847 by Binney,”” Fr. Braun,” Bunbury,”° Gép-
pert,”! Lesquereux,”” Rouillier,”* and others, none of which can be
specially considered here.

About thirty papers and books, small and great, relating to fossil
plants appeared in 1848, none of which, however, can be ranked as great
works, unless it be Bronn’s Index Palontologicus,”* which merely
includes the plants with all other fossils in one alphabetical arrange-
ment. The number, however, of what may be classed as second-rate
productions was quite large. Among these we may count Unger’s
“Flora von Parschlug,””* Berger’s thesis “De fructibus et seminibus

27M, A. Pomel. Amtlicher Bericht der Versammlung der deutschen Naturforscher
und Aertzte, 1847, pp. 332-354.

218 Phil. Mag. Vol. XXXI, 1847, p. 259.

219Frtedrich Braun. Die fossilen Gewichse aus den Grinzschichten zwischen dem
Lias und Keuper des neu aufgefundenen Pflanzenlagers in dem Steinbruche von Veit-
lahm bei Culmbach. Flora, Regensburg, 1847, p. 81. (Enumerates 57 species of Rhe-
tic plants.

#20 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. London, 1847, Vol. III, pp. 281, 423.

221 Uebersicht der Arbeiten d. schles. Gesellschaft, 1847, pp. 70-73.

22 Explorations dans le Nord de l’/Europe pour I’étude des dépéts de combustibles
minéraux. Bull. Soc, Sci. Nat. de Neuchatel, Tome I, 1847, p. 471. Idem sur les plantes
qui forment la houille. Bibl. Univ. Archives, Tome VI, p. 158. Genéve, 1847.

»8C. Rouillier. Etudes paléontologiques de Moscou, in Fischer de Waldheim’s
Jubilaeum semisecularem. Moscou, 1847. (Bois fossiles, pp. 20-24).

1 Heinrich G. Bronn. Handbuch einer Geschichte der Natur. III. Band., III.
Theil. Organisches Leben. Index Palxontologicus, oder Uebersicht der bis jetzt be-
kannten fossilen Organismen. Stuttgart, 1843-1849. A. Nomenclator palexoutologi-
cus, 1848. B. Enumerator palwontologicus, 1849.

6 Die fossile Flora von Parschlug. Steiermirckische Zeitschrift, IX. Jahrg., I
Heft. 1848. °

warp.] CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES. 421

ex formatione lithanthracum,”” Binney “On the origin of coal,”” three
consecutive papers by Dr. J. D. Hooker in the Memoirs of the Geologi-
cal Survey of Great Britain,” Debey, on the fossil plants of Aachen,”
Géppert’s prize essay on the formation of coal, °° Raulin’s “ Flore de
YEurope pendant la période tertiaire,*! Robert Brown’s memoir on Trip-
losporites,*” really announcing the discovery of the fruit of Lepidoden-
dron, and Sauveur’s “ Végétaux fossiles de Belgique.”?> These works
were all important additions to the literature of the science, and rep-
resented a large amount of original research.

The third volume of Bronn’s Index Palwontologicus, namely, the
Enumerator, did not appear until 1849. It contains Géppert’s table of
the vegetable fossils as known to him, arranged under their respective
geological formations. All the species are enumerated in systematic
order, but with an inconvenient appendix (pp. 5-72), and arenot summed
up at the end. The summary is, however, introduced in another part
of the volume (p. 727), and shows that considerable progress had been
made since 1847, when Unger made his synopsis in his ‘ Chloris Pro-
togaea,” although, a8 already remarked, the 1,648 species there given
is the same as given in his “Synopsis plantarum fossilium” (1845),
which seems not to have been revised, while Géppert had already
enumerated in 1844 (supra, p. 416) 1,778 species. From these figures we
now have an advance to 2,055, or more than four times as many as were
known to Brongniart in 1828, though only about one-fourth the num-
ber now known.

The great work of 1849 was Brongniart’s “Tableau des genres de végé-
taux fossiles.”* The author’s views relating to the classification and

26 Reinhold Berger. De fructibus et seminibus ex formatione lithanthracum. Dis-
sertatio inauguralis quam consensu et auctoritate amplissimi philosophorum ordinis
in alma litterarum universitate viadrina ad summas in philosophia honores rite capes-
sendos die XVIII, M. Decembris, A. MDCCCXLVIII. H.L. Q.S. publice defendet
Auctor. Vratislavie, 1848.

27 Memoirs of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, Vol. VIII,
1848, p. 148. 7

228V ol. II, pp. 2—456.

229 Verhandlungen des naturhistorischen vereines der preussishen Rheinlande, V.
Jabrg., 1848, pp. 113, 126.

230 Preisschrift. Abhandlung, eingesandt als Antwort auf die Preisfrage: *
ob die Steinkohlenlager aus Pflanzen entstanden sind, etc. Eine mit dem doppelten
Preise gekrénte Schrift. Haarlem, 1848, 4°, 300 S, 23 Taf., forming the 4¢ Deel,
Tweede versameling, Verhandl. Holl. Maatschappen.

231 Victor Raulin. Sur les transformations de la flore de l’Europe centrale pendant
la période tertiaire. Annales des sciences naturelles de Paris, 3° série, Botanique,
Tome X, 1848, p. 193.

232 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, ser. II, Vol I, 1848, p. 376; Proc. Linn.
Soc. I, 1849, p. 344; Trans. Linn. Soc., Vol. XX, Pt. I, 1851, p. 469, Pl. XXIII, XXIV,
Cf. Comtes rendus des séances de l’Academie des sciences, Tome 67, 1868, pp. 421426.

23J, Sauveur. Végétaux fossiles des terrain houillers de la Belgique, Académie
royale des sciences, des lettres, et des beaux-arts de Belgique, Tome XXII, 1848.

24Tablean des genres de végétaux fossiles consideré sous le point de vue de leur
classification botanique et de leur distribution géologique. Paris, 1849, 8°. Diction-
naire uniyersel d’histoire naturelle.

* *

422 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

distribution of the extinct genera and species of fossil plants are here
systematically set forth and superbly illustrated. A memoir on the
same subject? appeared in the “ Annales des sciences naturelles” for the
same year, in a manner summarizing his views and giving lists of fossil
plants belonging to each horizon. In seeking to avoid all duplications
that result from giving different names to different parts of the same
plant, his enumeration is reduced to very modest proportions and
falls inside of 1,600 species, while, by treating Giningen and Parschlug
as Pliocene instead of Miocene, he greatly exaggerates the importance
of the former horizon at the expense of the latter. But the era of
Miocene exploration had only just begun, and that formation did not
give evidence of its present overshadowing supremacy until the labors
of Heer and Ettingshausen began to reveal its true character.

Pattison’s “Chapters on Fossil Botany”? is a very superficial at-
tempt to treat the subject in a popular way, and its only value is a table
of British fossil plants, which, if it could be depended upon, would show
the number then known to amount to 529, of which 279 were from the
coal measures, 120 from the Tertiary, and 89 from the Oolite.

A large number of works and memoirs on vegetable paleontology
appeared in 1850, perhaps exceeding that of any previous year. Most
of these, however, were of modest pretensions, and only two can prop-
erly be classed among great works on the subject. These were Unger’s
“Genera et species plantarum fossilium”*’ and Gdéppert’s “Mono-
graphie der fossilen Coniferen. ”?*

As Unger had in 1845 published, in his “‘ Synopsis,” the first complete
catalogue of fossil plants, so he was the first, in 1850, to publish a com-
plete manual on the subject, for such is the nature of his ‘Genera et
species.” This work is a shapely octavo volume of 668 pages, written
wholly in Latin, and describing in systematic order every species of
fossil plant known to the author. The total number thus described
is 2,421, a large advance upon any previous estimate. Among the
good features of the work are an enumeration of the genera under
their proper orders and classes in a table that precedes the descriptive
part, the reproduction, brought down to date, of his previously pub-
lished “ Literatura nostri evi,” and a thorough species index at the
end, distinguishing synonyms by printing them in italics. In his classi-
“ fication he follows the natural order of development, beginning with
the lowest forms. He declines to follow the English authorities in

#35 Exposition chronologique des périodes de végétation et des flores diverses qui se
sont succédé a la surface de la terre. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot., 3° sér., Tome XI, 1849,
pp. 285-338.

2368. R. Pattison. Chapters on Fossil Botany. London, 1849, 12mo.

*%7Franz Unger. Genera et species plantarum fossilium. Sumptibus Academia
Casarcve scientiarum. Vindobone, 1850.

8H. R. Géppert. Monographie der fossilen Coniferen. Eine im Jahre 1849,
mit der goldenen Medaille und einer Premie von 150 Gulden gekronte Preisschrift.
Leiden, 1850. Naturkundige Verhandelingen van de Hollandsche Maatschappij der
Wetenschappen te Haarlem. Tweede Verzameling, 6° Deel. Leiden, 1850.

WARD. CHRONOLOGICAL NOTES. 423

treating Stigmaria as a dicotyledonous plant. He places the “Cy-
cadeacew” between the Cryptogams and the Monocotyledons, but
Strangely separates them from the Conifer and Gnetacex, which he
makes to follow the palms and precéde the forms now referred to the
apetalous division ; though he does not recognize by special names the
divisions of the Dicotyledons established by Jussieu. Still, in arrang-
ing the orders, he follows the system of A. L. de J ussieu, and not
that of Adrien de Jussieu. No illustrations accompany this work.

Iu Géppert’s “ Monographie der fossilen Coniferen” we have another
of those exhaustive works upon difficult subjects which characterize
this author. When we say that it forms a quarto volume of 359 pages,
with 58 plates, half of which are devoted to the illustration of internal
structure as revealed by microscopic examination, we have given buta
rude idea of the work. The first 67 pages relate entirely to living
Conifers and fitly prepare the way for a thorough treatment of the
fossil forms. To the treatise on fossil Conifers is prefixed an historical
introduction of nearly a hundred pages, in which, as in the historical
introduction to his “Systema filicum fossilium,” he marshals the litera-
ture with great effect, and, as in the former case he found it impossible
to confine himself to fern life, so in the present case he makes it the oc-
casion for a thorough study of the history of man’s acquaintance not
merely with coniferous fossil wood, but with fossil wood in general,
which for ages remained the only known torm of vegetable petrifaction.

Besides the systematic description of all coniferous fossils known to
him, the work contains a most valuable enumeration of localities where
fossil wood, beds of coal, and fossil plants in general had been found
from the year 1821 to the end of 1849, arranged primarily according to
their position in the geological system. It also contains an arrange-
ment of the species of Coniferz according to geological horizons.

The remainder of the numerous productions of the year 1850 must be
passed over in silence, as their bare enumeration would consume con-
siderable space, and without glancing at their special merits would add
little to the reader’s knowledge respecting them. As has already been
stated (supra, p. 379, 380) it was in 1850 that both Massalongo and Baron
von Ettingshausen began their work in the domain of fossil plants, so
that at this date no less than fourteen of those who have been men-
tioned as leaders of the science were living and actively engaged in ex-
tending its boundaries.

We have thus passed in review the literature of fossil plants from
the earliest records down to the close of the first half of the nineteenth
century. The plan was, and still is, to continue this survey down to
the present time, though confining attention more and more, as the
literature increases in volume, to the most important works. But for
the present purpose the carrying out of this plan is manifestly impos-
sible from considerations of both space and of time, and it must be
postponed until the work to which it was intended as an introduction

424 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

shall have been completed. This is specially to be regretted, as so
little had been done down to 1850 to develop the paleobotanical resources
of America. It is algo true that at that date little had been done beyond
the collection and accumulation of data for study. From the time when
the practice of discussing imaginary problems without any data fell into
disrepute the opposite and far more healthful tendency to treat facts as
the end of research chiefly prevailed, until at length, at the time when
we are compelled to close our record, a sufficiently large body of facts
had been brought to light, and, through the organizing power of Unger,
Brongniart, and Géppert, had been arranged for study and comparison,
to render it somewhat profitable to speculate upon their probable
meaning.

In the decade that followed some such speculation was indulged in
very cautiously, but this always resulted in the clearer recognition of
the need of still more facts, and undoubtedly tended strongly to stimu-
late research. Then commenced that systematic attack along the
whole line of paleobotanical investigation. Ettingshausen’s system of
nervation for the determination of dicotyledonous leaves may be re-
garded as the result of the pressure, then irresistible, for the means of
identifying the now vast accumulations of this important class of fos-
sils. Heer’s researches into the fossil floras of Switzerland and of the
arctic regions, and Lesquereux and Newhberry’s investigations into the
Dakota, Laramie, and Green River groups of the Western United
States, together with Saporta’s ‘‘ Etudes” in the south of France, fur-
nished more data than that of all the collections previously made from
the later formations.

The work of exploration still goes on. Saporta has elaborated the
Jurassic of France, Grand’ Eury and Renault have thoroughly studied
the Carboniferous of that country, as have Williamson and Carruthers
that of England. Nathorst has opened up the subterranean floral treas-
ures of Sweden, and Dawson those of British America, while Engelhardt,
Hosius, Van der Marck, and Schenck have continued to investigate,
without exhausting, the rich plant-beds of Germany. In America ac-
tivity has not diminished, notwithstanding the advanced age of both
the principal cultivators of this science. Large works, which have re-
quired years in preparation in the hands of both Lesquereux and New-
berry, are either on the eve of publication or are far advanced toward
completion. Professor Fontaine, of the University of Virginia, has an
important work on the Rhetic flora of Virginia in press, and is collect-
ing some most interesting material for a second from the lower Creta-
ceous or upper Jurassic of the same State. Large collections have
lately been made by different parties of the United States Geological
Survey, which are now in hand for examination, while fresh material
is daily arriving at the National Museum from all parts of the country.

Between eight and nine thousand species (as species are made) of
fossil plants are now known to science, and the time must be near at

WARD.) NOMENCLATURE AND CLASSIFICATION. 425

hand, if it has not already come, when this wide acquaintance with the
ancient floras of the globe, if properly organized for study, will afford
such aid to geological investigation as to command recognition, while

the lessons which it supplies to the botanist and the biologist will be
inestimable.

VIII. NOMENCLATURE AND CLASSIFICATION OF FOSSIL
PLANTS.

Science does not consist in names, but it cannot well progress without
them, and early in the history of every science a system of nomenclature
always arises. Agaiu, a knowledge of natural objects consists largely
in a knowledge of their relations, to obtain which systematic attempts
at their methodical arrangement are among the first steps. However
humble such efforts may at first be, they nevertheless constitute the
beginnings of scientific classification. The objects may be arranged
before names are given to them or to the groups they are seen to form,
as in Bernard de Jussieu’s Garden of the Trianon. But usually the
naming either precedes or closely accompanies the process of arrange-
ment. Such at least has been the case with fossil plants. This fact,
however, is to be here considered: That the science of botany proper
antedated by far that of paleobotany. A few names were given to
vegetable remains during the period when nobody believed that they
either were themselves plants or represented plants. The reaction
from this view, which took place at the beginning of the eighteenth
century, in favor of the diluvian theory, carried its votaries much too
far, and led them to think that every fossil plant must represent
some known living one. This extremism had its fitting exemplifica-
tion in Scheuchzer’s now obviously ridiculous attempt to classify the
fossil plants of his time under the same rubrics as the living plants.
The timely appearance of Tournefort’s “Elémens de Botanique,” in
1694, in which about the first real system of botanical classification
was drawn up, afforded Scheuchzer the desired opportunity, and with-
out waiting for the appearance of a second edition of his ‘“ Herbarium
diluvianum,” he hastened to arrange all his species under Tournefort’s
twenty-one classes, and published them, in 1816, in his “Oryctographia
Helvetix” (pp. 203-247). In spite of his zeal, however, a large residue
of unassigned fossil plants remained as a special “ Class unkantlicher
Gewiichsen oder dero Theilen, welche uns von der Siindfluth ubrigge-
blieben” (p. 236). This attempt was continued in the Hditia novissima
of the “Herbarium diluvianum,” published in 1723 (Appendix).

In this rash scheme Scheuchzer was not followed. Lhwyd, in 1699,
had applied the term Lithoxylon to fossil wood, which, with the ex-
ception of the impressions described by Major, mentioned on p. 389
(supra), was the only form of vegetable fossil known down to his time.

426 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

Volkmann (1720) adopts this term, and also Lithophyllon, while to all
impressions of leaves and fronds he gives the general name of Litho-
phytes, but he goes a long way in the direction of Scheuchzer in accept-
ing the indigenous theory (supra, p. 395). Schultze (1755) treats the whole
subject of plant impressions from a strictly mineralogical point of view,
designating his figures by the old indigenous names of Scheuchzer and
Volkmann; but the three general classes of petrifactions which he de-
scribes without naming are of interest, as showing that he possessed a
firm and rational grasp of the phenomena. They are: (1) Whole trees,
large trunks, thick roots, and other similar woody matters transformed
into stone; (2) impressions of twigs, leaves, flowers, etc., which consist
either in whole or in part of the remains of the originals in a petrified
state; (3) impressions of stems, plants, and shrubs in which no trace
of their former parts is perceptible.

Walch (1769) was the first to offer anything like a nomenclature of
fossil plants, and although most of his names have now disappeared
from the text-books, they still served a useful purpose during a long
embryonic period in the history of the science. He called petrified
trunks by the terms Lithodendron and Dendrolithus ; pieces of petrified
wood Lithoxylon, and also Stelechites ; petrified roots, Rhizolithus. If
the fossil remains bore a sufficient resemblance to any living tree or
plant, it was called by the name of that plant, with its terminal sylla-
ble changed into ites, as Daphnites, Sandalites, etc., a method which is
still extensively employed in the creation of fossil genera of plants.
Herbaceous plants were called Phytolithi, but he distinguished mere
impressions of ‘these as Phytotypolithi. Fossil leaves were Lithobiblia,
Bibliolithi, or Lithophylla. Phytobiblia referred to the leaves of herbs
as opposed to those of trees. He mistook the Calamite for great reeds,
and applied to them this name, as also that of Lithocalmi, the first of
which has come down to us notwithstanding the misnomer. Fossil
fruits he denominated Carpolithi, which is another term that has sur-
vived in the long struggle for existence.

Parkinson (1804) contented himself by giying a simple classification
in English, although he refers to the Latin names which had been
given to his groups by previous authors. His terminology was, (1)
fossil trees ; (2) fossil plants; (3) fossil roots; (4) fossil stalks ; (5) fossil
leaves ; (6) fossil fruits and seed-vessels.

Steinhauer (1818) made four classes: Fossil wood (Lithoxylon), fossil
fruits (Lithocarpt), fossil leaves (Lithophylli [sic]), and fossil flowers, of
whose existence he seemed doubtful. He describes ten species, all of
which he classes under the one genus, Phytolithus. Considering the mea-
gerness of this presentation it is somewhat surprising that Steinhauer
should have actually been the first to apply specific names to fossil
plants, and thus to bring them fairly within the circle of natural his-
tory sciences. It had thus taken more than a century to complete the
cycle from the attempt of Scheuchzer to apply Tournefort’s classifica-

warp.] SCHLOTHEIM’S CLASSIFICATION. 427

tion to fossil plants, through the “ indigenous” and “exotic” stages
incident to the diluvian theory and back to this humble beginning ona
true scientific basis as a systematic: science, and it is properly from the
appearance of this unpretentious memoir in an American scientific serial
that paleobotany as a systematic branch of natural history should date
(supra, p. 403).

Baron von Schlotheim, in his “ Flora der Vorwelt” (1804), had made
no attempt to assign names to the forms he so admirably figured, but
confines himself to questioning and criticising the “indigenous” and
“exotic” names which they had received from the early authors. “If
the author had established a nomenclature for the plants which he de-
scribed,” said Brongniart, *‘ his work would have become the basis of all
the works which have since been produced on the same subject.” But
it was scarcely too late for him still to acquire this honor, for between
this first work and the appearance of his “ Petrefactenkunde” (1820) no
important treatise on fossil plants other than Steinhauer’s memoir was
published, and in this second work, which, as we have already seen, so
far, at least, as the treatment of vegetable remains was concerned, was
merely the continuation of the first which had been interrupted by
political troubles, a systematic nomenclature was adopted and carried
out in detail (supra, p. 404). He styled the entire vegetable kingdom
sofar as fossils are concerned, P hytolithes, without, however, employing
as Steinhauer had done, the term Phytolithus as a genus. Out of it he
carves five classes, though he does not sodenominate them. Under two
of these larger divisions fall subordinate ones which may be called orders
the other three remaining undivided with an ordinal and even generic
rank of theirown. The following is the outline of Schlotheim’s system:

I. Dendrolithes.?”

A. Lithoxylithes.
B. Lithanthracites.
C. Bibliolithes.

II. Botanilithes.

II. Phytotypolithes.
a.) Palmacites.
b.) Casuarinites.
ec.) Calamites.
d.) Filicites.
e.) Lycopodiolithes.
J.) Poacites.

IV. Carpolithes.

V. Anthotypolithes.

Under his Dendrolithes and Botanilithes no species are introduced,
but certain forms are described, compared, and discussed. Especially

239 Prodrome, p. 3.
0 The anglicized forms are here employed as Schlotheim employed the German

forms: Dendrolithen, Lithoxylithen, etc.

428 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

interesting are his notes on the Bibliolithes in which most of the dico-
tyledonous leaves, then known, are referred to. Of Palmacites he
describes fifteen species under regular systematic names. Of Casuari-
nites he gives five species ; of Calamites, ten; of Filicites, twenty-three ;
of Lycopodiolithes, five ; of Poacites, four; of Carpolithes, fifteen, and of
Anthotypolithes, one. The science of paleobotany could therefore start
from this date with seventy-eight species described and figured.

Count Sternberg, in his “ Flora der Vorwelt,” established a large num-
ber of genera, which he founded upon the most thorough investigation,
a large share of which have resisted the destructive agencies of subse-
quent research. Among these were Lepidodendron, Flabellaria, Annula-
ria, Neggerathia,and Sphenopteris. His determinations were modest and
sound, and he was able only in a few cases to refer the fossil forms to
living genera, as in Osmunda, Asplenium, etc. But the most impor-
tant departure effected in this work was in establishing vegetable
paleontology for the first time upon a geognostic basis. He assumed
three periods of vegetation : (1) an insular period characterized by the
great coal plants; (2)a period characterized by the predominance of
cycadean types, and (3) a period introduced by fucoidal remains and char-
acterized by dicotyledonous forms. it will be at once perceived that
these three periods correspond substantially with the Paleozoic, Meso-
zoic, and Cenozoic ages of modern geology.

Passing over the system of Martius, published in 1822,%! which,
though having merits, has been received with less favor, we now come
to that of Brongniart, the first draft of which also appeared in 1822.7
In this memoir all fossil plants were divided into four classes, ex-
pressly so-called, viz., (1) stems whose internal organization is recog-
nizable; (2) stems whose internal structure is not recognizable, but
which are characterized by their external form; (3) stems joined to
leaves or leaves only; (4) organs of fructification. The first class is
divided into Eaxogenites and Endogenites, having the rank of genera.
Under the second class, besides Calamites of Schlotheim, Syringoden-
dron of Sternberg, and other genera, there occur for the first time the
genera Sigillaria and Stigmaria. Sternberg’s Lepidodendron is divided
into Sigillaria and Sagenaria, to the latter of which Sternberg’s name,
Lepidodendron, is now generally preferred. Stigmaria is the equiva-
lent of Sternberg’s Variolaria. Under the third class Lycopodites is
substituted for Schlotheim’s Lycopodiolithes, Asterophyllites tor his
Casuarinites, and Phyllites for his Bibliolithes. Schlotheim’s Filicites
and Poacites are adhered to and the new genera, Sphenophyllites and
Ficoides, are established. Under the fourth class Schlotheim’s two
genera, Carpolithes and Antholithes, are retained.

*1C. F. Martius. De plantis nonnullis antediluvianis ope spec#rum inter tropicos
viventium illustrandis. Denkschr. der kénigl. baierisch. botan. Gesellsch. in Regens-
burg, Band II, 1822, pp. 121-147, Pl. I and II.

° Mémoires du Muséum Whistoire naturelle, Paris, Tome VIII, 1822, pp. 209-210.

warD.] BRONGNIART’S CLASSIFICATION. 429

Without further discussing here the beautifully illustrated work of
Artis (supra, p. 406) who attempted, for.the most part unsuccessfully, to
create several new genera, we may now profitably compare the method
just reviewed with the one put forth six years later by the same author
in his “Prodrome.” On page 9 of that work he gives the key to his
new classification in the following words: “La méthode que nous avons
adoptée pour classer et dénominer ces fossiles, est fondée également
sur ces rapprochements plus on moins intimes entre les plantes fossiles
et les plantes vivantes.” Laying aside the former method, based chiefly
upon the nature of the fossil, i. ¢., the part of the plant which hap-
pened to be preserved, he now makes bold to assign all these forms
to some of the great natural divisions of the vegetable kingdom as es-
tablished by the Jussieus and other botanists. Butas already remarked
(supra, p. 406), geognostic considerations and a firm faith in the laws of
development led him to suggest some important modifications in this
so-called natural method, as may be seen by comparing the following
scheme from page 11 of the “Prodrome” and from page 20 of the
“ Histoire des végétaux fossiles”:

I. Agams.
II. Cellular Cryptogams.
III. Vascular Cryptogams.
IV. Gymnospermous Phanerogams.
V. Monocotyledonous angiospermous Phanerogams.
VI. Dicotyledonous angiospermous Phanerogams.

In the present state of botanical science Brongniart’s Agams would
probably all be relegated to his second group, or Cellular Cryptogams,
but in other respects. this classification is pre-eminently sound, and seems
likely to be vindicated by the future progress of the science as against
some of the recent systems emanating from the highest authorities.

To these few general groups Brongniart proceeded to refer the fossil
forms either as new and avowedly extinct genera, or, wherever possible,
as extinct species of living genera. This was carried entirely through
the system in his ‘‘ Prodrome,” and, so far as it went, the “ Histoire”
afforded ample justification for his determinations in the form of full
descriptions and thorough illustrations. This latter work was in a man-
ner completed by his “Tableau” “ in 1849. The method of Brongniart
has, with few exceptions, been adopted by subsequent paleobotanists,
Une of these exceptions, however, is too important to be passed over.
although it has already been considered in certain of its bearings. This
is the system of Lindley and Hutton. These authors, apparently in
order to emphasize their dissent from the theory of development, re-
versed the order, placing the most highly developed forms first. They
also placed the Conifer and Cycadez in the subclass Exogene, or

43 Tableau des genres de végétaux fos-iles considéré sous le point de vue de leur
classification botanique et de leur distribution géologique. Paris, 1849. (Dictionnaire
universel d’histoire naturelle.

430 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

Dicotyledons, without intimating that they differ in any essential re-
spect from oaks or elms.
The followin g is their system in outline:

CLass IL.—VASCULARES, or FLOWERING PLANTS.

Subclass 1. ExoGENz, or DICOTYLEDONS.

Nymphzacez.
Laurines.
Leguminose.
Ulmacez.
Cupulifere.
Betulinez.
Salicinez.
Myricez.
Juglandes.
Euphorbiacex.
Acerines.
Conifer.
Cycadez.
Doubtful.

Subclass 2. ENDOGENZ, or MONOCOTYLEDONS.

Marantacese.
Asphodelee.
Smilacez.
Palme.
Fluviales.
Doubtful.

Flowering plants which cannot be with certainty referred to either
the monocotyledonous or the dicotyledonous classes.

Ciass IL.—CELLULARES, or FLOWERLESS PLANTS.

Equisetacez.

Filices.

Lycopodiacez.

Musci.

Characes.

Alge.

Plants the affinity of which is altogether uncertain.

Stigmaria is put in the Euphorbiacee, Sphenophyllum in the Conifer,
Annularia and Asterophyllites in the Dicotyledons, Neggerathia in the
Palme, while Sigillaria and Voikmannia are classed with the last, or
wholly uncertain group.

With the rapid increase of material for the study of fossil plants the
possibility of referring them to living families and genera has increased

WARD.) THE NATURAL METHOD. 431

until at the present time nearly all the remains of the former vegeta-
tion of the globe are readily assigned to their proper place in the gen-
eral system adopted by botanists. Within a few years the number of
dicotyledonous species has become so large that the attempt to identify
them has been eminently successful. By the aid of a set of rules de-
duced from the prolonged study of the nervation of leaves the genera
of fossil Dicotyledons have been in great part made known. The only
prominent question which this increased knowledge has raised in the
department of classification has been with reference to the order in
which the divisions of Jussieu should stand. It is, however, now gen-
erally admitted that the order in which these three divisions of plants
appeared was that of Adrien de Jussieu and not that of A. L. de J us-
sieu,” the Gamopetala constituting the most recent group of plants
developed upon the globe. M. Schimper, while adhering to the old
method in this respect for his systematic arrangement of the families,
has nevertheless clearly shown that this does not represent the order
of nature, and in his review of these groups“ he has arranged them
according to the natural method. :

It is thus that after two centuries of floundering in turbid waters the
science of paleobotany has at last found itself in condition to take its
proper place as a department of botany—the botany of the ancient
world—in which, whatever geology may gain from it, it must rest upon
geology as its solid foundation.

IX. THE NATURAL METHOD AS INDICATED BY PALEO-
BOTANY.

The aid that the study of fossil plants affords in arriving at a natural
classification of living plants is of prime importance, because it sup-
plies at first hand the chief object for which all classification legiti-
mately exists, viz., a knowledge of how existing forms came into being
and why they are what they are.

Much as we may delight in the discovery of new and beautiful forms,
and may admire the objects in our possession as products of nature and
pets of our specialties, we must, as investigators of nature, feel a higher
interest in the great problems of their origin and development, whose
solution in strictly scientific ways constitutes the proper aim of science
itself.

The method by which these problems can be most successfully attacked
is the method of classification. Notwithstanding the contempt into which
mere ‘‘systematists” have latterly fallen, the true scientific method is
still and must ever be the systematic method. The real cause for the
present disdain of systematists, lies in the mistaken spirit in which

“Adrien de Jussieu. Cours élémentaire d’histoire naturelle. Botanique. Paris,

1840, p. 395.
46 Traité de Pal. vég., Tome I, pp. 83-87

432 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

system-making has been so commonly conducted. Systems of classifi-
cation had come to be regarded as the end of science, when they are at
best only the means. But it is not to be wondered at that this was so,
since it was not until quite recently that science could be fairly said to
have any end other than to collect facts and build systems. Not until
the laws of genetic dependence among the forms of organized life, as
taught by Lamarck in 1809 and enforced by Darwin in 1859, had begun
to be recognized within the last twenty years, was any such grand re-
sult thought possible as that of ever finding out how existing forms
have come to be what they are. With the growth of this conception
all attempts at classification gradually became revolutionized in their
spirit and aim, and from being merely logical and ideal they tended to
become practical and real. Whereas formerly some collected facts for
the sake of facts, and others built systems for the sake of systems, now
all collect facts for the sake of systematizing them and systematize them
in order to learn what they teach; for neither without facts nor with-
out system can we ever arrive at truth.

It is customary with botanists to speak of artificial systems of classifi-
cation as contrasted with the natural system. It is commonly supposed
that the system of Linnzus was wholly artifical, and the impression
equally prevails that that of Jussieu was the true natural one. Butin
the progress of human discovery no such sudden leap ever takes place.
The truth is that all systems have aimed to be natural and that none
have wholly succeeded. But there has been progress in the concep-
tion of what constitutes a natural system. The most that the older bot-
anists aimed to secure was a logical system, and it was supposed that
the logical necessarily represented the natural.

a

1. TYPES OF VEGETATION,

The vegetation of the globe has always been divided into certain ob-
vious groups which may be called types, the word “type” being here
used in a very general and indefinite way. These types of vegetation
have various systematic values. The following table contains the prin-
cipal ones, with a brief explanation accompanying each:

Synoptical View of the Types.

CrYPTOGAMS.—Flowerless plants.
Cellular Cryptogams.—Devoid of vessels or vascular bundles; e. g.,
sea-weeds, mosses.
Vascular Cryptogams.—Having vascular bundles—fibers, ducts, ete.
Filices.—Ferns.
Ehizocarpee.—Inconspicuous plants, of interest chiefly as ap-
pearing to form the transition from the Cryptogams to the
Phenogams through the Cycadacee; e. g-, Marsilia, Sal-
vinia, Azolla.

WARD.] TYPES OF VEGETATION. 433

CRYPTOGAMS.—Flowerless plants—Continued.

Equisetinew.—Rush like plants, with whorls of leafless branches;
é. g., Calamites, scouring rushes.

LIycopodinee.—Plants with scaly stems or trunks; e. g., Lepi-
dodendron, club-mosses.

Ligulatce.—Inconspicuous plants, of interest chiefly as appear-
ing to form the transition from the Cryptogams to the Phe-
nogams through the Coniferx; e. g., Isoetes.

PHAZNOGAMS.—Flowering plants.
Gymnosperms.—Plants having their ovaries open and the ovules
and seeds naked or exposed.

Cycadacew.—Trees midway in general aspect between tree:ferns
and palms; ¢.g., sago palm.

Conifere.—The pine family ; ¢. g., pine, fir, cedar, yew, etc.

Gnetacee.—A small family of leafless plants, interesting chiefly
as appearing to form the transition from the Equiselines:
to the Dicotyledons, through the Casuarine; e.g., Ephedra
antisy philitica.

ANGIOSPERMS.—Plants having their ovules and seeds protected by
closed ovaries.
Monocotyledons.—Plants that come up with a single blade, or coty-
ledon; stems endogengus; e. g., grass, lily, palm.
Dicotyledons.—Plants that come up with two leaves, or cotyledons;
stems exogenous.

Apetale or Monochlamydee.—Plants having but one floral en-
velope (a calyx but no corolla); ¢. g., oak, willow.

Polypetale.—Plants having two floral envelopes (a calyx and a
corolla), the corolla consisting of separate petals ; ¢. g., rose,
magnolia, maple.

Gamopetale or Monopetale.—Plants having two floral envel-
opes, the corolla consisting of a single piece, or petal; e¢.
g., honeysuckle, catalpa, trumpet-flower.

The names contained in this table are the modern ones, and other
terms with, perhaps, about the same meaning will be found in the sys-
tems of classification of the older botanists, while in some such systems
quite different groups are recognized as primary.

2. THE LINNZ:AN SYSTEM.

The history of the progress made by botanists proper, without the aid
of paleontology, in the direction of the natural method, did space per-
mit, would well repay examination. I shall confine myself to presenting
the three principal systems in a much-abridged form, as perhaps the
most satisfactory way in which that progress can be indicated. The
systems to which I refer are those, respectively, of Linnaus, of A. L.
de Jussieu and of Adrien de Jussieu. The first of these, the system of
Linnzeus, is introduced merely to show that it is not altogether an arti-

GEOL 84——28

434 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

ficial one, but, like all the rest, an effort at real classification. More
clearly to indicate this I have arranged it in logical form, and, for brev-
ity’s sake, have introduced a number of non-Linnzan terms:

The Linnean system. ;
Cryptogamia ....2. 02222. eee ee cece cee eee cere teen cee ee cere eee ee Cryptogamia.
Polygamia.
Diecia.
Monecia.
(Gynandria ... ..--.--. 2 -- esse eeeeee----- Gynandria.
bee

DiGlinde: sos caw cccus ec eenawe saree es wines Gane ERR Seca tees

Polyadelphia.
Diadelphia.
Monadelphia.
(Anisan-§ Tetradynamia.
dria. Shee
olyandria.
Pheno- Teoundries
Bamiae Dodecandria.
Hermaphrodite { Eleutherogynia Decandria.
Enneandria.
Eleutheran- Octandria.
dria. Isandria< Heptandria.
Hexandria.
Pentandria.
Tetrandria.
Triandria.
Diandria.
{ L | Monandria.

Desmandria --..-.-.---

L L

All who are familiar with the Linnean system will, of course, ob-
serve that the order is here inverted. The names of the successively
larger groups, with theexception of the terms “ Cryptogamia” and “ Phe-
nogamia,” are merely invented to obviate the necessity of describing
those groups. This form of presentation clearly shows to how large an
extent Linnzus aimed at a logical classification.

3. SYSTEMS OF THE JUSSIEUS.

We will next glance at the systems of the Jussieus. Bernard de
Jussieu has merely left us his catalogue of the garden of Trianon,
but this enigmatic list of names is regarded by modern botanists as
containing the germ of all later systems. Guided by it, his nephew,
Antoine Laurent de Jussieu, proceeded to elaborate the celebrated Jus-
sizean system, of which a mere outline is presented in the following table:

System of A. L. de Jussieu.

Acotyledons.
Monocotyledons.

Apetale.
Monopetala.
Polypetale.
Dicline.

This system, as will be observed, rests primarily upon the number of
cotyledons, and in making the Cryptogams co-ordinate with the Mono-
cotyledons and the Dicotyledons fails to draw the great dividing line
which Linneus clearly perceived between the Cryptogamic and the
Phenogamic series.

Dicotyledons

WAED.] BOTANICAL SYSTEMS, 435

Tn re-elaborating it, his son, Adrien, adhered to this defect, but intro-
duced some improvements. We will next glance at this latest form of
the Jussizan system:

System of Adrien de Jussieu.

Acotyledons.
Monocotyledons.
an Gymnosperms.
Diclinw........... | Angiosperms.
Dicotyledons ... Apetale.
Hermaphrodite ... ? Polypetala.
Monopetale.

In this case we see a very great advance in the recognition of the
Gymnosperms. In transposing the Polypetale and Monopetale# he
also departed from the views of his father, and in this modern botanists
have not followed him, although, as remarked above (p. 431), this
change would undoubtedly be in the direction of a true natural system.

4. SYSTEM OF MODERN BOTANISTS.

From the systems of the Jussieus to that which prevails among bot-
anists of the present day the transition is slight. Linneus’s Crypto-
gamic and Phenogamic series are restored; the terms “ Exogens” and
“ Endogens” are introduced as synonymous with *‘ Dicotyledons” and
“ Monocotyledons,” of which they take precedence; the Gymnosperms
are recognized, and A. L. de Jussieu’s order is restored for the Poly-
petalz and Monopetale, for which latter name that of “ Gamopet-
ale” is coming to be preferred, while for ‘‘ Apetale” the term Mono-
chlamydee is substituted by some. The system, then, is substantially
as follows:

Cryptogams.
( Endogens, or Monocotyledons.
Gymno- Cycadacee.
Conifers.
sperms.

Phenogams.¢ Exogens, or Gnetacee.

Dicotyledons. : Apetale, or Monochlamydez.
Angio- Monopetala, or Gamopetale.
saree Polypetale.

All modern text-books invert the order and begin with the Phzno-
gams, but whether advisable or not this is intended merely to facilitate
study, the higher forms being easier of comprehension, and does not at
all imply that our leading botanists believe this to have been the order
in which plants have developed. This inversion of the order, how-
ever, shows how completely the notion of development is ignored in
modern botany, and the system throughout rests upon the evidence
furnished by the organs of the plants as they are understood. It is
proper to say that at the present. time quite a large body of the most
thorough students of vegetal embryology and histology, especially in
Germany, have rejected much of this system, and especially that which
concerns the Gymnosperms. These they prove in the most satisfactory

436 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

manner to constitute a lower type than any other of the Phenogams,
and they conclude that they form a more or less natural transition from
the Cryptogams to the Phenogams, between which they place them.
This result is most gratifying to the paleontologist, fur nearly or quite
every work on fossil plants gives the Gymnosperms this position at the
base of the Phenogamic series, so sagaciously assigned to it by Brong-
niart. Paleobotanists have been compelled to do this in the face of
the prevailing botanical systems, because this is the position which they
are found to occupy in the ascending strata of the earth’s crust. It is
astonishing that botanists could have remained so indifferent to such a
weighty fact, and it is certainly most instructive to find the geological
record, so long unheeded, confirmed at last by the facts revealed in
living plants. There is no evidence that those who have thus confirmed
it were in the least influenced by it, and Sachs is as silent as to paleon-
tology as is Bentham or Gray.

The founders and perfectors of the prevailing system of botanical
classification have not been influenced in any marked degree by the idea
of development in vegetable life. Few of the earlier ones had ever
heard of development, and those who had heard of it rejected it as a
visionary theory. This system had become established long before the
doctrine of the fixity of species had received a shock, for although La-
marck, himself a botanist, had sown the seed of its ultimate overthrow,
still it required half a century for this seed to germinate, and it was
during this half century that the Jussizan system was supplanting the
Linnean and gaining a firm foothold.

It is our special task to examine this system by the light of the now
universally accepted laws of development and to see in how far it con-
forms to those laws. We shall see that, with a few important excep-
tions and some unimportant ones, this purely logical classification is in
substantial harmony with what we now believe to be the order de-
manded by the law of descent—an encouraging fact as showing that
natural truth may often be correctly discerned by purely rational pro-
cesses. Had Jussieu been told that the Monocotyledons and Dicotyle-
dons were the direct descendants of the Acotyledons he would probably
have treated the proposition with contempt. In his system the latter
were placed before the former merely because they represented a lower
grade of organization, and it was the relative grades of organization
that determined the position of the minor as well as of the major groups
throughout the Jussizan system.

5. MODIFIED SYSTEM PROPOSED.

Now, therefore, that we have been compelled, from an entirely differ-
ent class of evidence, to accept the fact of descent, we are glad to find
that this does not wholly revolutionize the system arrived at from con-
siderations of structure alone, while at the same time we must claim
that this substantial agreement furnishes a strong corroboration of the
theory of descent.

WARD.] - BOTANICAL SYSTEMS, 437

The following table may be taken to represent, so far as the tabular
form will permit, the system of classification called for by the present
known facts of structural botany and of paleontology.

Assumed natural system.

Cryptogams.
Cycadaces.
Gymnosperms. 2 Conifers.
Gnetacez.
Phenogams. Monocotyledons.
: Apetala.
Angiosperms.. Dicotyledons. 2 Polypetale.
Gamopetale.

A glance at this table will show that the most important respect in
which it differs from the one last examined 1s in the position and rank
of the Gymnosperms. Whereas there the Gymnosperms and Angio-
sperms have only the rank of subclasses under the class Exogens, or
Dicotyledons, they here assume the rank of classes, and the Monocotyle-
dons and Dicotyledons are reduced to subclasses under the class An-
giosperms. The Gymnosperms are thus taken out of the Dicotyledons
entirely. This is done because the distinction of open and closed ovaries
is regarded as a class distinction, and the Monocotyledons are as truly
Angiosperms as are the Dicotyledons, since they possess the closed ovary;
because the Gymnosperms are not dicotyledonous, the number of cotyle-
dons varying from one to fifteen ; and because, while all Gymnosperms
are not strictly exogenous nor all Monocotyledons strietly endogenous,
the woody structure of the Conifere differs fundamentally from that of
all dicotyledonous plants. Buta discussion of these points would carry
us too far.

It will also be perceived that the order proposed by Adrien de Jus-
sieu for the divisions of the Dicotyledons is here adopted, the reasons
for which have already been referred to and will receive more special
attention hereafter.

6. CLASSIFICATION OF THE CRYPTOGAMS.

Thus far we have considered the Cryptogams as an undivided group
of plants; but they too are capable of subdivision. The classification
of the Cryptogams, however, is still in its infantile stage and is the
problem which is at this moment most earnestly claiming the attention
of advanced botanists. The subject is too special to be entered into
here, and I shall confine myself to naming a few of the groups which
modern investigation has shown to throw. some light upon the more
general problem of descent in plant life.

That the first proper plants were cellular Cryptogams there is no
question, and to that class still belong a great number and variety of
forms, the seaweeds, fresh-water alge, fungi, lichens, liverworts, mosses,
etc. From these have in all probability descended the vascular Crypto-

438 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

gams, now chiefly represented by our ferns, club mosses, and scouring
rushes. Leaving the cellular Cryptogams undivided, we will consider
some of the groups of the vascular Cryptogams. The great preponder-
ance of these forms of vegetal life throughout Paleozoic time renders
this necessary, notwithstanding their insignificance at the present epoch.

As in the present, so throughout the past, the vascular Cryptogams
are prowinently divided into three great groups, which may be roughly
designated asthe fern group, the Calamite group, and the Lepidodendron
group. Ancient ferns differed from those with which we are acquainted
in being nearly all arborescent, or tree-ferns. The great Calamites of
the coal-measures are now represented solely by our genus Hquisetum,
or scouring rush, while the Lepidodendron had degenerated into our
little ground-pines and club-mosses (Lycopodium).

A careful study of the fossil remains of the Calamites and lepido-
dendroid growths of the Carboniferous period shows clearly that they
were then much more closely related to each other than are the present
Equisetaceze and Lycopodiacex, and there can be little doubt that
strictly intermediate forms existed. We may therefore class them
together under a larger general group, to which we will give the name
Lepidophytes. There is also a suggestive resemblance between some of
the tree-ferns and certain of the Calamites, so that far back in that
hoary antiquity of vegetable life we find a certain homogeneity and
monotony, which show that those plant-forms as we now understand
them were to a large extent undifferentiated and blended together.

Two small orders of cryptogamic vegetation, too rare to be frequent
in a fossil state, and, indeed, unless formerly much more robust than
now, too frail to admit of preservation except under the most favorable
circumstances, possess for the modern cryptogamic systematist an extra-
ordinary interest. These are the Rhizocarpex, or pepperworts, now
chiefly represented by Salvinia, Marsilia, and Azolla, and the Ligulate,
to which belong only Isoetes, the quillworts, and Selaginella. The reason
for this special interest lies in the fact that the plants of these two
orders, alone of all Cryptogams, possess characters which seem to mark
the transition from the cryptogamic mode of reproduction to that of the
Gymnosperms. In this the Rhizocarpee are supposed to approach
more closely to the Cycadacee, while the Ligulate simulate rather the
Conifer. On account of this exceptional prominence of these two
orders I give them a separate place in the following table of classifica-
tion of the Cryptogams:

Cellular Cryptogams.

Filiciner...... ee (Ferns).
izocarpes.
Vascular Cryptogams. Equisetine.
Lepidophytz.. 2 Lycopodines.
Ligulate.

By uniting this table with the one last examined a somewhat com-

WARD.] PLANT LIFE OF THE GLOBE, 439

plete view of the classification warranted by the present knowledge of
plant life may be gained.

7. GEOGNOSTICO—BOTANICAL VIEW OF THE PLANT LIFE OF THE
GLOBE.

We will now attempt to marshal in as convenient a form as possible
the principal facts which paleontology and modern botany afford, with
a view to examining their bearings upon the problem of classification
in general and upon those of descent and development in particular.
In doing this we are compelled to depend upon the weight of evidence -
furnished by the number of species alone, since it is impossible to take
account of the relative predominance of species, however great and
important the differences may be in this respect. The number of
species really marks the degree of variety or multiplicity, which cer-
tainly forms a rude index to the degree of abundance or prominence.
Where a number of types are compared this difference in their degree
of variety may fairly be assumed to apply to all alike, and the conclusions
thus drawn will be measurably accnrate; and in general this multiplicity
of varying forms under larger types may be taken in a manner to rep-
resent the relative exuberance or luxuriance of the type, and thus
roughly to indicate its relative predominance as a form of vegetation.

In all attempts to argue from paleontology allowance must, of course,
be made for the imperfection of the geological record, and in no de-
partment is this imperfection greater than in that of plants. Yet it is
certainly remarkable how large a portion of the earth’s surface has,
at one epoch or another, presented the conditions which have proved
favorable to the preservation of vegetable remains. Our surprise at
this is heightened when we contemplate the present state of the globe
upon which that condition seems scarcely to exist. We know that the
great land areas of our continents are wholly incapable of preserving
the leaves that annually fall upon them, and it is only in the quiet beds
of rivers that have reached their base level, or in their deltas, or else
in localities where tufa-laden spring water flows over vegetation, or
lastly, in our great swamps, that such a result is possible. This last
condition is believed to furnish the key to the solution of the problem
of most of the ancient vegetable deposits, but the limits of this paper
forbid me to enter into a discussion of this subject.

The following table presents in a rough manner the history of the
introduction of plant life upon the globe as revealed by the remains
that have actually been discovered. It has been compiled from about
25,000 species slips which have been the product of nearly two years’
labor in cataloguing the literature of Paleobotany. Although this work
is by no means completed, still, it embraces nearly all the more recent
and more important works on the subject, and hence cannot fall far short
of affording a correct view of the present state of knowledge of the
fossil flora of the globe.

440 SKETCH OF PALEOBUTANY.

Number of species of each of the principal types of vegetation that have been found fossil in
sible to ascertain; together with the percentage that

CRYPTOGAMS.
VASCULAR.
Geological formations. Cellular. Rhi Tae
hizocar- | Equiseti- | Lycopodi- :
Ferns. per. nex. new. Ligulates.
Num-| Per |Num-| Per |Num-| Per |Num-| Per |Num-| Per |Num-| Per
ber. | cent.| ber. | cent.| ber. | cent.| ber. | cent.) ber. | cent.| ber. | cent.
Present time ...--..----- 35,000 |23. 89 |3,000 | 2.05 | 100 | 0.07 30 | 0.02} 500] 0.84 | 400 | 0.27
: Quaternary .-.....-- 27 | 33.3 Cd (el ees ees 2] 2.5 |... nw] eee e open een eeoeone
3s Amber.... ...-- BT | Bee levees leereay
‘i ; | Pliocene......--|.-----|.----- 3] 3.
8 | E | Miocene - 168 |55 | 87 | 2
3\3 Oligocene. . 17| 22). 17}| 2.
© | & | Green River. 5| 2.2 8} 3.
i 10.3 22) 3.
2.5 7| 6
; 3.9] 23) 6.9 I
Z 6.5 73 | 20.6
3 20.0 1 | 20.0 |.
8 3.3 38 | 15.5
2 0.5 7) 3.3
BE Gatlteecrcirscca|emavnileceienc 10 | 27.8
_ | O | Urgonian. ......|....--|.-.--- :
:
ix
Sls
3 | 3
co be
=|
5
& | Keuper.........]..--.-|...---
# | Muschelkalk -..
& |BunterSandstein|......|......
| Permian ...........-
¢ | Carboniferous. ......
‘a | Subcarboniferous . -.
S |Devonian .....--
© | Upper Silurian. .
7 Lower Silurian
Cambrian <cccesce<-| 2 10000 |oecwccjewscnc| cocwes [scecwelsnewea|oceses

WARD.] PLANT LIFE OF THE GLOBE. 441

each geological formation, also the number existing at the present time as nearly as it is pos-
each type forms of the total flora of each formation.

PHANOGAMS.

GYMNOSPERMS. ANGROSPERMB.

Total.
Dicotyledons.

Cycadacem.| Coniferm. | Gnetaces. arenes
: Apetalx. | Polypetale. |Gamopetale.

Num-| Per | Num-| Per | Num-| Per | Num-| Per | Num-| Per | Num-; Per | Num-| Per | Num-
per. |cent.| ber. |cent.} ber. | cent.) ber. |cent.| ber. |cent.| ber. | cent.) ber. | cent.| ber.

75 | 0.05 300 | 0. 24 40 | 0.03 |20, 000 /13. 65 |12, 000 | 8.19 |35, 000 ‘28, 89 40, 000 [27.31 |146, 445

|

Lis 27 | 33.3 8| 9.9 7| 8&7 81
3.0 5| 7.5 1/15 7 | 10.4 67
9.2 32|326| 31/316] 10] 10.2 98
8.9} 926 | 27.1 | 1,064 |) 35.0| 346 | 11.3] 3,046
10.6 | 256] 83.1| °259]33.6| 70] 91] 772
9.2] 85 | 87.1 73| 31.9} 20] 87] 229
16.8| 162 | 23.6 | 221 | 321 59| 86 689
pees eae 5.9| 57| 47.9] 39 | 32.8 5) 42! 19
1] 03 9.9 9.0
5| 14 5.1 5.1
ya “OR , 2.9
7] 3.3 2.4 2
2) 5.5 5.5 d
21 | 19.4 5.6
6 | 15.4 5.1
43 | 35.5
17) 26.2] 17 | 26.2 |....-.-|.-.---[eneeee-[eee eee
116 | 27.7
43.3
26 | 20.5
15 | 36.6

442 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

Before entering upon a general survey of the development of plant life
as shown in this merely numerical exhibit, it will be necessary to refer
the reader to three diagrams (plates LVI, LVII, LVIII), which have
been prepared with a view to rendering the principal facts embraced
in the table more readily intelligible, and then to discuss each of the
diagrams separately, keeping the numerical data constantly in view.
For the execution of these diagrams I am indebted to Ensign Everett
Hayden, United States Navy, on duty at the National Museum in the
Department of Fossil Plants, who has not only plotted and drawn them,
but has aided me greatly in selecting from among the many possible
modes of graphic illustration the ones which, as I believe, most success-
fully serve this purpose.

In all the diagrams an effort is made, of course in an approximate
and very rude manner, to indicate time-measures in terms of thickness
of strata, this being, however imperfect, certainly the only standard
attainable. Ina lecture delivered at the National Museum on Feb-
ruary 24, 1883, on Plant Life of the Globe, past and present, enlarged
diagrams having a similar object to those introduced here were. used
for illustration. The data then obtainable for their preparation were
very defective, and the time-measures were taken from Dana’s “ Man-
ual of Geology.” Those who may remember them, from notes taken or
otherwise, will observe that in this latter respect the accompanying dia-
grams differ widely from the ones presented on that occasion. Upon
investigation it appears that the views of geologists generally have
changed materially since the appearance of the last edition of that
work, and recent observations have tended to show that the thickness
formerly assigned to Mesozoic, and especially to Tertiary, strata was
much too small in proportion to that assigned to Paleozoic, and especi-
ally to Silurian strata. After consultation upon this subject with the
Hon. J. W. Powell, Director of the Survey, it was decided that nearly
equal vertical space might be given to each of the following formations,
or groups: 1, Cambrian; 2, Silurian; 3, Devonian; 4, Permo-Carboni-
ferous ; 5, Jura-Trias ; 6, Cretaceous; 7, Eocene; 8, Mio-Pliocene. These
have accordingly been taken as furnishing the scale of time equivalents,
and all the diagrams have been drawn to this scale.

The development of vegetable life through geologic time may be dis-
cussed from three somewhat distinct points of view. We may, in the first
place, consider each of the principal types of vegetation at each of the
geologic periods in which it occurs solely with reference to its relative
importance in the combined flora of that epoch. This is undoubtedly
the most important point of view from which the subject can be contem
plated, and has accordingly been considered first. It is clear that the
data for this must consist, not in the actual number of species at each
horizon, but in the proportion, or percentage, which this number
forms of the total number found at such horizon. Diagram No. I is,
therefore, based upon these percentages as given in the foregoing table.

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CORSE OAC eaves
CELLULAR VASCULAR GYM
GEOLOGICAL FORMATIONS :
ee ee eee Rhizocarp. Equisec
Filices and Lycopod Cycadaceae
[ | & | |
PRESENT TIME
QUATERNARY
L Pliocene
N
©
Z, Miocene
ca]
ts | ASTI
Oligocene
Eocene
Paleocene
Laramie
CRETACEOUS! ¢ somanian |||
Lv Gault
6 Lt yan
N licaa aera
Sean Wealden
L Coral |
= | JURASSIC | Golite
= poe
Lias
Rheuuc
| Keuper _
TRIASSIC | Muschelkalk
Buntersandst
Permian
PERMO
Carboniferous \
CARBONIF
Sub-carbomel ma = =
ee
= & ve Rae
N
° DEVONIAN
A 2
o
q
(abe ses : a
Upper
SILURIAN |= =
| Lower
|
CAMBRIAN

EH. del

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT PL.LvI

1S Del NE ANSTO) (eh AS
ISPERMS AN GOS PE RMS
MONOCOTYLEDONS PICO T YL ED ONS
Comferae and —
Gnetaceae Apetalae Polypetalae Gamopetalae

= - ~
!

———

Julius Bien & Co Lith

WARD.] DISCUSSION OF DIAGRAMS, 443

In the second place, we can consider each type of vegetation by and
in itself, with a view to determining the geological age in which it first
made its appearance, the general nature of its progress through time,
and the period of its maximum actual development as an element of the
vegetation. Such a presentation, however, when based on the number
of species actually found at each horizon, exhibits very great fluctua-
tions, due to the irregularities in the record. These irregularities de-
pend chiefly upon conditions quite independent of the real presence or
abundance of the plants in any formation. These conditions are many,
but the principal ones may be embraced under three heads: 1. The
plants must have existed at the period in question. This is the legiti-
mate assumption and alone gives value to the diagram. 2. The condi-
tions for their preservation and then for their subsequent exposure must
have occurred. Any one can see how exceedingly irregular must be
these delicate conditions at different ages of the world. 3. The locaili-
ties in which they are embedded must have been discovered and worked
by the paleontologist. This is the great contingency which stands in
the way of our acquaintance with any flora, but although doubtless

‘ more potent than the one last named, it possesses the merit of possible
removal through the industry of man.

With all these detractions from its value this form of illustrating the
geological record is nevertheless presented in Diagram No. II.

In the third place, we may, by a legitimate exercise of the rational
method of science, construct a scheme of illustration, based indeed upon
these facts as indispensable landmarks, yet recognizing the law of uni-
formity in natural processes that constitutes the primary postulate of
science itself, which shall, to a large extent, eliminate the error of the
defective record and present a rational and highly probable view of the
true development. By asecond act of ratiocination the probable period
of first appearance of each type of vegetation may be deduced from the
fact as to the earliest point at which it has actually been discovered,
and thus an approach far nearer, at least, to the true history of plants

- than is possible by the last-named method may be made. Diagram No.
III presents the subject from this third point of view.

Discussion of Diagram No. I—In this diagram the Cryptogams are
represented in buff tints and the Phanerogams in purple, with deeper
shades for the successively higher types of each series. The diagram is
based upon the assumption of the proportionate representation of types
in the known floras of each age. Collectors of fossil plants never select.
They take everything they find and make no attempt to find particular
forms. If, therefore, the chances of preservation of different kinds of
plants were equal the chances of finding any particular kind would de-
pend upon its actual degree of abundance in the given flora. Con-
versely, the degree to which any type of plants is represented in the
collections made would be a fair measure of such abundance or of the
relative prominence of the type in the flora of the given epoch. How-

444 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

ever imperfectly such a flora was represented in the collections, this re-
lation would theoretically hold, and thus the imperfection of the geolog-
ical record would be eliminated so long as it was only contemplated
from this relative stand-point. And although it is not true that all
kinds of plants stand an equal chance of preservation, still the classi-
fication of plants according to their adaptability to preservation is
wholly different from their systematic botanical classification and trav-
erses the latter in such a manner as rarely‘to coincide with its bound-
ary lines or to exclude any entire group from the possibility of being rep-
resented in the fossilstate. Nevertheless, such omissions, orat least very
disproportionate representations, will occur and must be allowed for.
The theory also fails where a flora is only very meagerly represented,
and the smaller the representation the less applicable the principle. This
accounts for certain great irregularities in the diagram, which are great-
cst in the least adequately represented formations. Such defects will
be readily rectified by the intelligent student of the diagram, and it was
thought better to leave this to his judgment than to attempt to overcome
the defects by an arbitrary reduction of irregularities. The numerical
table will aid in making the proper allowance in each case by indicat
ing, as the diagram cannot do, the poorly-represented horizons. Upon
the whole this diagram may be regarded as trustworthy in intelligent
hands and as fairly indicating all that is claimed for it..

That vegetable life should have preceded animal life is a fair deduction
from all that we know of these two kingdoms of nature, and, not to
speak of the much-disputed Hozoon Canadense of Canadian so-called
Azoic rock, we at least have Oldhamia in the Cambrian, whose organic
character is quite generally admitted. This and other facts give weight
to the view that the dark carbonaceous substance found in the Lauren.
tian has been the result of accumulated vegetable matter of marine ori-
gin, but too frail in structure to admit of preservation in any other form.
Graphite, too, which is a pure form of carbon, and thus almost demon-
strates vegetable origin, is found below the Silurian. But, dismissing
these speculations and admitting the somewhat doubtful vegetable :
character of Oldhamia, we actually have organized plants, marine alge,
preserved in the Lower Silurian and even at its base. Such are Bilo-
bites rugosa, Chondrites antiquus, and Sphaerococcites Scharyanus. The
Cellular Cryptogams are thus fairly introduced at points lower than
that of the appearance of any higher type of vegetation, and by the close
of the Silurian fifty species had made their appearance, constituting
85 per cent of all the life of that epoch as thus far found. Not only in
this case, but all through the series, the order in which these great
types of vegetation are here drawn up agrees substantially with that of
their appearance on the globe, as shown by actual specimens collected
and determined. If the system of classification had been based exclu-
sively upon paleontological data, there would be no force in this, but, as
I have shown, it is in large measure that of botanists proper who never

WARD.] DISCUSSION OF DIAGRAMS, 445

argue from paleontology, and most of the points in which it differs from
accepted botanical systems have been independently confirmed by
structural botanists.

More remarkable still, perhaps, than the early appearance of marine
alge is that of certain well-organized vascular plants that must have
inhabited the land. Among the earliest forms of terrestrial vegetation
we find the ferns, those graceful forms whose green, airy fronds are still
the delight of every judge of natural beauty. We have at least one
well-authenticated species in the Silurian—Zopteris Morierii of Saporta—
found by Moriére a few years ago at the base of the Middle Silurian, a
gilt figure of which its namer has made the frontispiece of one of his
last works.* The fern may be almost taken to represent the primary
form of the vegetative process. Its delicate spray resembles, most of
all plant-forms, the exquisite frost-work which we see on our windows on
a cold morning. The physicists tell us that these latter are the result
of molecular activities and consist in the deposit of solidified molecules
of invisible vapor. Plant-growth consists in the deposit of solidified
carbon molecules upon the growing surfaces of plants. Perhaps, then,
we should not wonder at the resemblance between the earliest forms of
plant life and those other forms which nature creates by the action of
the same principle, and which the chemist can imitate in certain modes
of precipitation.

In the Devonian we have 79 species of ferns, and this type of vegeta-
tion reaches its maximum in the Carboniferous epoch, which, if we ex-
tend it to include the Subcarboniferous and the Permian, furnishes 877
species, forming nearly 45 per cent of the total flora of that epoch.
There are good reasons for supposing that during this age the ferns
were nearly all arborescent and really formed a large part of the Car-
boniferous forests. From this time forward they declined both in num-
ber and vigor until, at the present time, they are only 2 per cent of
the vegetation of the globe, and in nearly all cases consist of low
herbaceous plants, almost valueless except for their singular beauty.

Let us next consider the type which is here denominated the Equiseti-
nee. At the present time the natural order EHquisetacee embraces all
the plants of this group, and they are very few indeed and insignificant
in size, but in the Carboniferous age they formed nearly 10 per cent of the
vegetation, and furnished the great Calamites, which clearly show that
they were no mean element in the forest growth of that period. Certain
plants of this group—Sphenophyllum primevum, Annularia Romingeri—
were found by Mr. Lesquereux in the Cincinnati group of the Silurian,
an horizon, perhaps, lower than that of Hopteris, and we must therefore
regard this type as of exceedingly ancient origin. The Calamites dis-
appear entirely in Mesozoic time and the type dwindles into insignifi-
cance.

246.e Monde des Plantes avant l’apparition de "homme. Paris, 1879. (See pp. 35, 166.)

446 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

The Lycopodinee, now represented by the natural order Lycopodiacee,
and constituting little more than one-third of 1 per cent of the living
vegetation of the globe, embraced in the Carboniferous epoch the lepi-
dodendroid group. About four hundred species of these plants have
been described from the Subcarboniferous to the Permian, and during
their reign they formed nearly one-fourth of the vegetation of the globe.
They were the largest forest trees of their time, and sometimes attained
a great size, though, of course, nothing approaching the giants of our
present forests. This ancient, or archaic, type disappears entirely with
the Permian, and never reappears. Its degenerate descendants con-
tinue down to the present, chiefly in the form of club mosses, of which
considerable variety exists.

The two remaining groups of cryptogamic plants, the Rhizocarpee
and the Ligulate, possess little paleontological importance, although the
number of species, including spore-cases, that have been referred to the
former of these orders has now reached seventeen, four of which are
Paleozoic (Devonian and Subcarboniferous) and four Mesozoic. These,
as well as most of the Miocene species, belong to the genus Salvinia or
one nearly allied to it (Protosalvinia Dawson), although one Pilularia
has been found at Giningen, and a true Marsilia occurs in an undescribed
collection now in my hands, made by Captain Bendire in the Miocene
of the John Day River region, Oregon, and which I propose to call Mar-
silia Bendirei, should there prove to be no inaccuracy in this determi-
nation.

As regards the Ligulate, they are still less frequent in the fossil state,
and are thus far represented only by the two very dissimilar genera,
Selaginella and Isoetes. Unless, as has been affirmed, the former of
these genera has its representatives in the Carboniferous, the group is
not found lower than the Cenomanian of Atane, Greenland, where Heer
has detected his Selaginella arctica. Mr. Lesquereux has described
three species of this genus in the Laramie group, and the same author
has found a true Isoetes in our Green River Eocene, at Florissant, Colo-
trado. Two more species of Isoetes from the Miocene of Europe exhaust
the enumeration, making in all only seven species of Ligulate.

We have thus rapidly glanced at the relative development of each of
the cryptogamous types of vegetation, and will next consider that of the
phanerogamous types. As already shown, the Gymnosperms stand
lowest, and have probably, in some still undiscovered way, descended
from the Cryptogams. Of these we place the Cycadacec lowest on ac.
count of their endogenous growth, circinate estivation, and other char-
acteristics which seem to ally them to the ferns. Still, as the lines are
now drawn by the best authorities, the Cycadacez cannot be traced be-
low the Carboniferous, while the archaic progenitors of the Conifers
extend far down into the Silurian. If we refer the Medullose to the
ferns, as Renault and Grand’ Eury would have us do, only three cyca-
daceous plants occur in the Carboniferous; but one of these is a true

WARD. ] DISCUSSION OF DIAGRAMS. 447

Pterophyllum from the coal measures of China, and there is probably a
second from Europe. Fourteen species occur in the Permian, includ-
ing the typical genera Dioonites and Olathraria. It is not, however,
until the Keuper is reached that this type of vegetation assumes a
leading part, and throughout the Jurassic it continues to be the most
abundant form of plant life. In the Lias it forms 43 per cent of the
flora of that formation, though this may be accidentally exaggerated.
It was 28 per cent of the Oolitic flora and more than 35 per cent of
that of the Wealden. From this point, however, its decline was rapid
and uninterrupted until in the living flora only 75 species of cycadace-
ous plants are known to botanists. Of these North America can claim
but a single one, the sago-palm (Zamia angustifolia) of our extreme
Southeastern States.

Passing to the Conifere, we find the Cordaites Robbii of Dawson
from the Devonian of Canada recurring in the Upper Silurian of Hé-
rault. This genus was formerly supposed to be the prototype of the
Cycadacee, but, as already remarked, this opinion is now abandoned by
the best authorities, and the genus referred to the Conifere. The evi-
dence upon which this change rests cannot be presented here, but it is
proper to say that the savants who have marshaled it have done so in
such a manner as to render their conclusion akin to irresistible. But
its adoption has carried with it a train of consequences which cannot be
escaped. Not Cordaites alone, or with its spore-bearing parts (Cordai-
anthus) and its fruit (Cordaicarpus), but Neggerathia, Trigonocarpus,
Cardiocarpus, Rhabdocarpus, Sternbergia, Artisia, etc., must all follow
in its wake and be gathered, one and all, into the great family of the
Conifere. it is thus, as shown by our table and diagram, that this
type assumes such a commanding position far back in Paleozoic time,
forming about one-fourth of the vegetation of the Permo-carboniferous
epoch. Doubtless this effect is exaggerated by duplications caused
by giving different names to separate parts of the same plant, but this
occurs throughout the series only to a less obvious degree.

The true Conifer, which have some representatives in the Paleozoic,
replace the Cordaitew entirely in the lower Trias and thereafter vie
with the Cycadacee for supremacy, which they do not fairly attain
until the lower Cretaceous is reached. Being of a higher type of struct-
ure than the latter by reason of their exogenous mode of growth and
other peculiarities, they refuse to succamb in competition with the now
rising Angiosperms and continue to hold their own through much of
the Tertiary. At the present time the number of known species (300)
would denote a great decline, but this is in large part made up by the
wonderful predominance and territorial expansion of these persistent
forms. Although from the point of view of the number of species
alone, the present Conifer would form but one-fourth of 1 per. cent
of the vegetation of the globe, we in fact find vast tracts of country
covered with pine, fir, and spruce forests, excluding. almost completely

448 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

all other types. But that the pine family is now waning there can be
no doubt. Important forms have wholly disappeared, and others that
once were abundant have now nearly vanished from the earth. Of this
last truth an example of unusual interest is furnished by the genus
Sequoia. Of the score or more of species that made up so large a part
of American Tertiary forests our well-known “ big tree” of the Sierras
(S. gigantea) and our California red-wood (S. sempervirens) now stand
alone and continue the combat against fate—the closing struggle of a
dying race.

Of the G@netacew J need not here speak, as its paleontological record
is almost nil, and its importance depends upon circumstances wholly
disconnected from its prevalence as a type of vegetation.

We come now to the Angiosperms. A great step forward had been
taken, and in her solicitude for her offspring Nature had, as it were,
built a house over the hitherto unprotected germs of plant life. The
closed ovary marks an era in the march of vegetal development.

The earliest form in which the Angiosperms appeared was that of
the Monocotyledon. Issuing from the seed and from the ground as a
single spear or blade, the plants of this type grow up chiefly by an in-
ternal circulation which can only deposit nutrition at the apex (endo.
genous growth). As the lowest type of Angiosperms we find them,
according to our scheme of classification, occupying also the earliest
position in the stratified deposits of the earth’s crust.

The existence of Monocotyledons in the Carboniferous and Permian
was long disputed, although Corda, after the most exhaustive study of
their structure, was obliged to refer two species of endogenous wood
to that subclass. This determination has been thus far sustained, and
to these have been added Paleospathe Sternbergii, Unger, in the Car-
boniferous, and two other species in the Permian. .The very problem-
atical Spirangium has generally been regarded as the fruit of some
Xyris-like Monocotyledon, and this view has been quite recently de-
fended by Nathorst. Its occurrence in the Carboniferous is now also
abundantly established by its discovery at Wettin, at Saint Etienne, and
at Pittston, Pennsylvania. Certain lily-like forms, called Yuccites, are
found in the lower Trias, and through the remaining Mesozoic these forms
increase slowly and are reinforced by screw-pines and a few sedge-like
plants. The monocotyledonous vegetation, however, does not receive
any marked character until the advent of the great palm family, which
dates from the Middle Cretaceous. From this time, notwithstanding
the rivalry of the now dominant Dicotyledons, this type progressed,
reaching its relative maximum in the Evcene. Overslaughed by the
higher growths, it thenceforward declined, but still numbers some
20,000 species and forms over one-eighth of the total flora of the pres-
ent epoch.

The step from the Monocotyledon to the Dicotyledon is very great,
and it seems to have required a vast period of time to accomplish it.

WARD. ] DISCUSSION OF DIAGRAMS. 449

Not only must a new form of growth from the seed and from the ground
be developed, and a sort of bilateral symmetry be introduced, but in ad-
dition to this, and, as I believe, in great part due to it, the exogenous
mode of circulation and tissue growth must supplant the endogenous
one, whereby the stem may increase in thickness as well as in length.
These great mechanical problems were worked out during Mesozoic
time and in the Middle Cretaceous, represented in this country by the
Dakota group, and in Europe by the Cenomanian epoch, the great type
of plant life appeared which was destined to domiuate the world and
sink all other forms into insignificance. But the most astonishing fact
is that this young giant was born, as it were, fall grown. In this lowest
horizon at which any Dicotyledons appear” we have already obtained’
more than three hundred species belonging to all three of the great
divisions of the subclass, and exhibiting ample, luxuriant foliage. They
embrace many of our most familiar forms, the poplar, the birch, the
beech, the sycamore, and the oak. Here appears the fig tree, the true
laurel, the sassafras, the persimmon, the maple, the walnut, the mag-
nolia, and even the apple and the plum. We must conclude, then, that
the Dicotyledonshad a much earlier origin than is shown by our defective
record, and that they had been long developing through the Mesozoic
ages.

If now we follow the advancing wave of plant life from this point up-
ward we shall see that from the new vantage-ground furnished by the
closed ovary, the perfect flower, and the exogenous trunk, its march
was rapid and steady until we reach the Miocene Tertiary, the culmi-
nating point in the paleontological series. Here the species actually
found are numbered by thousands, and the higher types greatly pre-
dominate over the lower ones. But from this point the record begins
to fail, and can no longer be trusted. Very little is found in the Plio-
cene, and still less in the Quaternary; but this cannot indicate an ac-
tual decline in these types of vegetation. It must be due to the ap-
proach of a state of things which rendered the preservation of vegetable
remains difficult, a condition, as already remarked, which is especially
characteristic of the present state of the globe. The march of the Di-
cotyledons was uninterrupted, and still continues. The figures given in
the numerical table represent, in round numbers, the ‘stimates of
Messrs. Bentham and Hooker, as given in their “Genera Plantarum,”
and may, therefore, be taken as the most reliable that can be obtained.
The three divisions of the Dicotyledons combined amount to 87,000 spe-
cies, and constitute nearly 60 per cent. of the flora of the globe.

With regard to the three divisions of the Dicotyledons, although they
are all represented in the lowest formation at which any considerable
number are found, still the Apetale constitute a larger proportion of the
Dicotyledons in the Cenomanian (45 per cent) than in the Miocene (37

urit we accept the solitary Populus primeva, Heer, from the Urgonian beds of
Kome, Greenland.
GEOL 84——29

450 ; SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

per cent), and very much larger in the Tertiary than in the living flora
(14 per cent), while the Gamopetal, which constitute only 5 per cent
in the Cretaceous, reach 15 per cent in the Miocene, and 46 per cent in
the living flora, here exceeding the Polypetala. From these facts it is
evident that the order of development is such as I have here given it,
and that the type of the future is to be not the Polypetalz but the
Gamopetale. These conclusions are independently corroborated by a
large mass of evidence of other kinds, but space forbids me to adduce
it in detail. I may simply say, however, that just as the closed ovary
of the Angiosperm in general furnished a condition for the development
of that class at the expense of the unprotected Gymnosperm, so the two
floral envelopes of the Polypetale and Gamopetale enabled those divi-
sions to outstrip the Apetale with its single floral envelope; and since
this advantage is proportional to the degree of protection secured, the
Gamopetale, with their tubular corollas are manifestly better adapted
to survire in this respect than the Polypetale. This is the chief argu-
ment, and, putting it with that from paleontology, it seems sufficiently
conclusive without detailéd support.

Discussion of Diagram No. II.—In this diagram the time equivalents
are the same as in the last, but only the more important types are rep-
resented. The Rhizocarpee, Ligulate, and Gnetacee are omitted, and
the Dicotyledons as a whole are shown, disregarding their subdivision
into Apetale, Polypetale,and Gamopetale. A figure is added represent-
ing the total of all the formations, and this is probably the most impor-
tant of them all, as least affected by the gaps and fluctuations in the
record. No account could, of course, be taken of the living flora, as is
done in Diagram No.I, for while between the fossil and the living floras
there is a similarity in the proportion that the types in each bear to the
sums of such floras, no such analogy holds between the number of species
actually known inany fossil flora and the number in the living flora. This,
at least, is true of the total floras and of all the types except, perhaps,
the Cycadace and the Couifere. But even here the comparison would
fail to express the rapid decline which these forms have evidently un-
dergone, at least so far as the number of their species, which represents
their diversity, is concerned.

While the diagram is of little service as a means of representing the
true development of each type of vegetation or of the general flora of
past ages, it has considerable value as an exponent of the true charac-
ter of the phyto-geologic record. It shows more clearly and more strik-
ingly than any words or figures could do the great differences that
characterize the different periods of geologic time in their susceptibility
to deposit, preserve, and afterwards expose to scientific investigation
the vegetable forms that coustituted the floras of those periods. While
this is well shown for the several dominant types it is especially obvi-
ous in the figure illustrating the entire flora. Here are brought promi-
nently into view, first, the age of island vegetation in the Carbon-

U. § GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Cryptogams.
Geological forma- Vascular.
tions.
Cellular.
Ferns. Equisetinez. Lycopodine.
Quaternary.
| X
ry | Mio-
2 Pliocene.
| ¢.
a |&
O;/E ~
©
& |
Eocene
Cretaceous |
3
3
Si H
=} +
3
a a
Jura-Trias.
Pei mo-Carbo-
niferous
Devonian.
3
S
S
Ci (re es
Ss.
a
A
Silurian.
Cambrian.

DIaGR
SHOWING THE OBSERVED ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF °

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT PL, LVIT

Phanogams.

Gymnosperms. Angiosperms. All vegetation.

Cycadacee. | Conifer. | Monocotyledons. Dicotyledons. |

:
|

M No. 2.
1E PRINCIPAL TYPES OF VEGETATION IN GEOLOGIC TIME.

wanD.] DISCUSSION OF DIAGRAMS. 451

iferous ;. next, the second and still greater age of extensive marsh,

vast low silat cut by shallow estuaries or partially or wholly cut off
from the sea and forming brackish or fresh water deposits, which culmi-
nated in the Miocene; then, the two intermediate periods of only less
favorable conditions occurring in the Brown Jura and the Cenomanian,
respectively; and, finally, the long intermediate ages of less favor-
able or wholly unfavorable conditions and the abrupt termination of
the entire period of plant deposition which accompanied the age of
mountain building towards the close of the Tertiary. The almost com-
plete absence of vegetable remains in the Trias, the lower Cretaceous,
and the Turonian of both continents points to the probable general sub-

sidence of land areas at those epochs, at least for such portions of the
earth’s surface as have been explored by paleontologists. But the great
relative abundance of such life in the middle and again in the extreme
upper Cretaceous shows that those must have been great land areas at
all times—areas which are now either under the sea or belong to some
of the still scientifically “‘ unexplored regions” of the globe. .The proof
of this is made conclusive by the fact that new and higher types come
forth abruptly in these floras which must have required ages of most
favorable conditions for their prior devc lopment.

Discussion of Diagram No. ITI.—This diagram is simply the application
of the rational scientific method to the incomplete facts afforded by the
present infantile state of the science of fossil plants. It does not pretend
to give the exact history of plant development, but only to constitute
a certain advance in this direction beyond what the fragmentary data
out of which it is constructed can alone furnish. For example, it is
certain that the earliest record discovered by man of the existence of
any type of vegetation cannot mark the absolute origin of that type,
and it is therefore necessary in every case to project the type down-
ward to an unknown distance. If the real facts could be indicated we
should see during these unrecorded periods the actual transformations
which must also be assumed to have taken place in each case before
the fully-developed type could appear. This we are unable to repre-
sent, and must merely indicate the early history of each type by its
downward projection to an assumed point of origin. Neither can it be
supposed that the great fluctuations shown in the diagram last con-
sidered are due altogether or chiefly to fluctuations in the degree of
vigor, territorial expansion, or local prominence of the given form of
vegetable life. They are the results of varying geological conditions or
of human good fortune, while the modifications in the forms themselves
take place slowly and at uniform rates either in the ascending or the
descending scale. Recognizing this law of uniformity, no fluctuations
in any homogeneous type have been admitted, but simply a more or
less regular development in each from its assumed point of origin to its
supposed period of maximum predominance, followed by an equally uni-
form decline to the present epoch when its condition relative to past

452 SKETCH OF PALEOBOTANY.

epochs is also indicated. The only exception to this rule has been made
in the case of the Cellular Cryptogams, whose heterogeneous character
has doubtless caused it to undergo considerable fluctuation. One such
is assumed in the Carboniferous, in which, though one of the great pe-
tiods of vegetable deposition, the actual number of Cellular Cryptogams
falls below that of either preceding or subsequent periods. This seems
to argue that there was a reduced representation of this form of plant
life in that age, and this is shown in the figure presented for that type.

The three facts which this diagram aims chiefly to bring out, not
shown in either of the preceding diagrams, are, first, the true origin, or
geological age of first appearance of each type of vegetation; second,
the period of its maximum development; and, third, the rank it occu-
pies in the living flora relative to its maximum. These are all delicate
points to fix in a manner that will satisfy all the conditions of the problem.
The evidence from all sides has to be cautiously weighed, care taken not
to give undue weight to any nor to undervalueany. These are not ques-
tions that can be hastily settled. They require to be pondered long
and well. Itis by no means claimed that substantial truth has been
reached in every case. No two persons, however competent, would
probably exactly agree upon all the points, and I am sure that at differ-
ent times with increasing evidence I have modified my own conclusions.
But this is far from confessing that the attempt is valueless, and it is
certain that great value should be attached to the enlarged conceptions
of vegetal development that flow from such a study.

Descent of plants.—But we need not stop here. The great law of de-
velopment does not allow us to contemplate these types as independent
of oneanother. Each class of plants must be regarded as the descend-
ants of some ancestral form more or less different from it. The multiple
origin of existing forms, whether of plants or animals, is repugnant to
modern scientific thought. Itis the discovery of facts that has rendered
itso. The multiple and varied of the present must be regarded as due
to divergences in the past. The forms we have have come down to us
along divergent lines from common ancestral forms. These are the
lines of descent, and plants have their lines of descent as well as animals
or human families. Of this we are practically certain, but just what
those lines are and where they diverged—these are the great problems
of phytogeny.

The lines of descent in the animal kingdom have been laid down by
various eminent zodlogists with considerable confidence and unanimity.
In plant life they have scarcely ever been attempted. The problem is
loaded with extraordinary complications and cannot be satisfactorily
attacked until we shall possess far more knowledge than we possess at
present.

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Geological forma-

Cellular.

Quaternary. |

Mio-
Pliocene.

Cenozoic.

Tertiary.

Eocene.

Cretaceous.

Cryptogams.
Vascular.

lisetinew. | Lycopodinee.

Gymnos
|

Cycac

Phanogams.

perms.

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT PUL. LVIIT

Angiosperms. All vegetation.

Dicotyledons.

Zz
=|
Jura-Trias.
Devonian.
5 =
g
a4
Silurian.
Cambrian.
DiaGraM No. 3.
SHOWING TITE ASSUMED ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL TYPES OF VEGETATION IN GEOLOGIC TIME.

o

INDEX.

Page.

Accompanying papers with report of Di-
TOQUE tcc tcc s sencatineducitebonsueeeeues 67-452
Adams County, Wisconsin ................ 223, 235
Adiantum, Supposed fossil ................. 402
Administrative reports ..................2. 3-66
; Becker, G.S ...... 47-49

; Chamberlin, T. C.. 20-24

; Clarke, F. W ..... 59-62
; Dutton, Capt. C.
Reecattaeseeene 42-43
; Emmons, 8. F..... 4347
; Gannett, Henry.. 3-14
; Gilbert, G. K ..... 30-34

; Hague, Arnold ... 15-19
; Hayden, Dr. F. V. 28-30
; Irving, Prof. Rol-

and D ..........-. 24-28
; Marsh, Prof. O.C. 49-50
3; McGee, W J...... 34-41
; Shutt, George W 64-66
; Walcott, Charles

52-55
; Ward, Lester F... 55-59
; White, Dr. C. A .. 50-51
; Williams, Albert,

JP scese sien aetslaeewss 63-64

Advantages for artesian wells of low incli-
nation of strata 146
Agams.............2- 429
Agawmok, Lake ..... 207
AgasslZ,; Prof. Av ccc. see cescncdnecaweeemete 54
L., an authority on glaciers... 309
; botany...-.------..- dua 376

Agricola on petrified wood

BW OR i eo iaiscicicieerersnpersie ssincicieieersccecicmsies
Airy, G. B., cited ........2... 0022-2 een ee eee 80
Alaska glaciers ~-- 348-355

Albertus Magnus the first to mention pet-

rified wood.......-----

on the virtus formativa.
Aleutian Islands glaciers .............-.+--

Alexander ab Alexandro on the Flood as the

cause of fossil remains ....-. ----.------- 391
Allan, Thomas, Contributions of, to paleo-

DOAN nie ssc eases seisew ses eccieesseees 404

Alport, S...ssi6: sececeseees -. 214

Amber Flora. ......--2..--0+. 415, 418

¢ ABO OTM wcnnnennwra - 418

; Origin and nature of ... --- 403

, Vegetable inclusions in....-.--... 415, 418

Amber-tree .....--..-. uegeseeeee wae = 0-408, 418

; Page.
SAO weocsn ree ceri doses e cinaijoeeeakwincuuiet 255
Amphibolites studied microscopically...... 201
Ancient glaciers of the Sierra Nevada...... 327

shores, Recognition of ...... 122
Ancients; causes of their ignorance. --- 888
j Passages supposed to indicate
their atquaintance with fossil
WORT, O0C.or.sursenceasuueuwk ase 387 |
, Knowledge and opinions of the,
- relating to fossils.......... 386, 393, 398
wholly ignorant of vegetable pet-
Tifactions .... 387
EE GS Oe Msi dveonieninacancaiasleg - 416
Andrews, Dr. Edmund, on wave action..... 88
Angiosperms........--.2. 00.022 sees cceees 433
, Development of the.......... 448

Animikie rocks . ..182, 187, 192, 193, 196, 197, 203-205
~ 206, 207, 215, 218, 224

225, 226, 227, 228

series; The 222 ccceeense exceed 203-205

Annularia established by Sternberg........ 428
regarded by Lindley and Hut-

ton as a dicotyledon.......-... 480

Romingeri ........2.. -.--...--- 445
sphenophylloides mistaken by

Lehmann fora fossil Aster .. 396

Anthotypolithes
Apetala.......
Aplin, S.A ..
Appalachian Division, The. -............... 48
Archean Formations of N. W. States; Prof.
R. D. Irving. ...-......--.---.- 175-242
Rocks studied by Prof. R. D.
TPVAN gs ioxcsie su ceinececicesuiclarte xxii
Areas of adverse, doubtful, and favorable
probabilities for artesian wells. ......... 172-173
Archeus, or spirit of the universe......... 389

Aristotle's doctrine of generatio equivoca.386, 389

conceptions of time limits ...... 398

Arlington Praitie, Wisconsin; St. Peter’s
sandstone -. ween. 228, 224
Arnold, Theodore, on the origin of fossils.. 390
Artesian wells, Art of sinking....-......-. 169

, Chicago, Il..
, Conditions of f
; confining stratum above...

139
;. below... 138
COstOfisccwerectusenesecace 170
, Decline of flow in - 157-165
, Denver, Col........ ~~ 45, 151
, Essential features of...... - 134

454 INDEX:
Page. Page.
Artesian wells, Fond du Lac, Wis ...-..-.. 143 | Benton County, Minnesota......-..---....- 200
, Increasing flow in ........ 154,155 | Berger, Reinhold, on the fruits and seeds of
, Irrigation by -.----- 148 the Carboniferous formation 420, 421
, Limits to depthof ... 167 | Bernadou, John B., U.S.N .-..-.-..--.22--- 32
, Oshkosh, Wis .--.- 143 | Bernardo glacier, Alaska ..-.......----.--- 352
, Palmyra, Wis .--.....-..-- 143 | Bianconi, Giuseppe G., on the determina-
; prerequisites .....-.-. .--- 135 tion of leaves by their nervation. -+--B80, 420
, Rate of delivery in........ 154 | Bibliography of North American geology... xxx
; superiority of oil region Bibliolithi, Bibliolithes..... .......--.-426, 427, 428
methods......---------+-- 169 | Bien, Morris 5
; typical examples a 184) Big vRork Rivers. so. ccccecuieniceeteees 206
; use of the diamond drill... 169 | Big Stone Lake..........-.-.--22.--..02-6-- 200
, Watertown, Wis ..-....--- 143 | ‘‘ Big tree" of the Sierras. we. 448
Artificial vs. Natural systems of classifica- Bilobites rugosa ....---...-- .-222----seeeeee 444
HOD se ce dageemtee nes Heveaceecee aces wees 432 | Binney, Edward William.........-....------ 369
Artis, E. T,; ‘‘Antediluvian Phytology ”..405, 406 , Contributions of, to paleobotany
ATUBIassccashohicansseeeceeheceeesnecaS -. 447 412, 415, 420, 421
Ashland County, Wisconsin ....-.. 218, 226, 232, 235 pOKOtCh Of sc ssc sicincutiees ear casan. 374
Aspleninum .......2.-...eee ee eee ee eens -- 428 | Biographical sketches of the leading paleo-
Aster Amellus ...... 022.2. .ece ee ee een eee 396 BOtADISES sap e,- 532.0 Seicic a rcisiee Sicicisicisie’s wtnieieinrs
montanus, Lehmann’s supposed Biology, Interrelations of Geology and
POSSI sic 55 dora cee iiweienteysreseie aoa Binge, Wo Miecaaaiaircaacivinarans. okisirarsiclavertcheineters
Sibiricus . Bimmoy Ds. Waseca siyelveee ss
aAsteiophyliites Black Bay, Lake Superior

Atking WJ: Dissecen see eesnayeesieeaos:
Augite schists studied microscopically ...-. 211
Auer and Worring's invention of physioty-

SPY Sowa Seeiawidna A cewehma ms eemenuieeece 380
Aura seminalis........... 3 390
Avicenna proposed vis lapidifica . --589, 390
PATONG 23 eseiac into sinsisie seem semecees 432, 438
SBAGURY OF vacas wip icicreemisalvereisisieteliciowenarat? 195, 228, 232
Ballenstedt, J.G. F., on vegetable fossils... 408
‘Bar, Phe scncncosessscaswus we tess sees 91, 92-95

NiBhaped sectscs scone nities kinks sce 98

Barrier, The

Barron County, Wisconsin ........-....-.-- 197
Barus; Dus Carl seensieiesein de sac ediacslenien XXXVI, 62
Bassett, C.C

Basswood Lake -.........-.-.2.--2-26- 205, 207, 208
Bauder, F. Fr., Rational views of, on the

nature of foasils.....--.........-.2.02.--- 395
BaUBINS acest soe es dele aciassiamasiese 388, 389, 390
Beach, Hon. Horace, on artesian wells ...-- 149, 151

ISU B icrocu ta sictete st ajatota cain tevcinlepe) avalerovanacuaiereie cate 87
Beaumont, Elie de, on wave action ....... 76, 79, 89
sandstones ........-- 220

Beche. (See Dela Beche.)
BeCker, GhiPiencck nates as Seer at sate aiet Gate, XXIV
, Administrative report of ..... 47-49
Beds bearing water .....-.....-.-...2..-2-- 135
, Inclination of.....-... 141
confining water .........6.---..0..--+ 138
, Height of outcropping ..-....... wees 143
, Surface condition of the porous...... 147
Beechy, Sir F.W......-..-.20.2--2- ceeeeee 354
Belcher, Sir E., cited on Alaska glaciers... 348
Bell, W. H., cited on Stikine River glaciers 352

, Canadian maps .
Bendire, Capt. Chas .. ;
Bentham Ji 435.655 sede cetentsedeseies sees

River Falls, Wisconsin, Potsdam se-

224
187
198
Blair, H.B 6
Blake, W. P., on Stikine River glaciers ... 349, 352
Blind River ......... icc wue Juceeeece 187, 189, 227
Bloody Cafion moraines ........-..------+-- 328

Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich, Rational
views of, on the nature of fossils. . ..394, 395, 399
Boccone. Paul, Rational views of, on the na-

ture-of fossils 2.0... 052. ceceeeet ce ace: 394
Bodfish, Sumner H....-.. 0.222. -2---- XVII, 7, 8, 41
Bolam glacier .-......-....-- Hie cates sheiawre sash 333, 334
Bonneville, Lake. (See Lake Bonneville.)
Bonney; D) Giexsewenccsceeecteanecescisass 221, 240
Bore, One large or several small ones, for

water supply ..--.---.-----------------ee- 155
Bos latifrons beneath ancient glacier. ...... 354
Botanical systems.........-..-.202-2.-2005 433-439
Botanilithes: ...cssecseiecissseeg vesersiac sae 427
Botany and phleobotany ; independent man-

ner in which they
have heretofore
been studied.... 367
, Interdependence
Ofsereestae'itaces 366
Boteler Wa. \we:o2 38 eesti we eiee sees 5,14
Bowerbank’s ‘' Fossil Fruits and Seeds of

the London Clay”’....--......2--2----.--- 413
Braddock’s Bay, Lake Ontario, Map -...-.- 94
Brain Growth: - sc. vseteeee pecs. cay 288-294

of Dinocerata ............... 284-294
Brainerd, Minn., Geological formation at .. 197
Braun, Friedrich, Paleobotanical contribu-

tons Of sseasncetade soeeusntiweesee nee es 420

Brewer, Prof.W. H., on glacial dirt bands.. 319

; oxperiments on sediments......... 62
Brewster, Patrick, Contributions of, to paleo-

Bridger series ..
BOON SMITE, Doc nsivnnviews vaiccoosune

INDEX. 455
Page. Page.
Brongniart, A.; fossil plantsof Hér,Sweden. 404 Catlinite or pipestone ................06 =» 201
A. T.; classification of fossil Cellular cryptogams ............20.2.00005 429, 432
plants .......... 407, 428, 429 of Brongniart ......... 429
; Contributions of, to pa- ; probable fluctuations
leobotany . .404, 405, 406, 408, in development..... 452
417, 421, 424, 428 | Cerutus, B ............. 393

; division of the geologic

series ........ waldo eis 407
; distribution of land veg-

etation ............. 404, 407
; mode of growth of coal

plants .....20-....... 400

» Rank of, as a paleo-
botanist ....368, 369, 406, 407

§ SRO Ol eo cvnwcsnenay 372
Bronn, H.G.; Index Paleontologicus..... 420, 421
Brontotherium beds.......................- 254

Brooks, Maj. T.B ......... -190, 191, 193, 229
Brown County, Minnesota..... ........... 200, 202
Crown, Robert, on Triplosporites .......... 421
Bruce Mine Bay, Lake Huron, quartzite... 230
Briickmann, F. E., on the diluvian origin of
fossil remains ...... 2.0... .cc cc cee eee ee ee 392
Brush, Prof. George J ............ wee BA
Buch, L. von; mode of growth of coal plant. 400
; nervation of leaves.......... 380
Buckland, W., Contributions of, to paleo-
botany
PGB OB ei § 5.56 se cman qmincoonnwas
Bunbury, Sir C.D ccc etcawseuwacovences
, Contributions of, to paleobotany, 419, 420
pele: OF ccerec cu eunuene osuae 379
Bittner, D. §8., on the diluvian origin of fos-
BU TOMAS. ec cewacnenees 392
Calamitas o. spieseicedevasniccephiiniecece sus 426
regarded by Walch and Suckow
as extinet..........-0- 2 eee eee 398
Calamites...........-.. areiceietnnnee 427, 428, 433, 445
California division, The.
redwood...
Call, R. E.......----.

Cambrian formation
Camerarius, Elias, on the origin of fossils...
Campement d’ Ours Island gray wacke
Canon, Twommneirca a ax: cscwecs ses ecsaeee

Capeller, Maurus Antonius, on the tropical

facies of fossil plants..........-.-.---.... 397
Capellint) Ge s....ce:cjocccicncouend coneccoaese 378
CardiocarpuS.....-...----------cececeenenee 447
Carl, J. F., on artesian wells of oil region.. 169

, describes packing support in
bored wells ............-----. 159

, describes use of torpedo in oil
a 155

, Samuel, Rational views of, on the nature
Of fOSsUSs eee etewedecewece sees - 894
Carpenter, P. H.,an authority on glaciers... 309
Carpolithes .........-202.--ececceeceeeeens 427, 428
Carpolithi...........0..020. cee ee eee e cence 426
Carruthers, William ....... as -- 869
; paleobotanicalinvestigations.. 424

Chamberlin, T. C XXI
; administrative report......... 20-24
; geology of Wisconsin cited.... 197

; map of Wiseonsin ........... 181, 194
ithe requisite and qualifying

conditions of artesian wells. 125
Champion mine, Michigan.................. 225
Chaney, G. O.........22... Bee 56
Chaplin, J ...... 2. eee ee Sees easeisbeastad 44
Chapman, R. H...-. 2... le eeeeeee eee eee eee 6
Chase). We Siicn6 ss c.cc. orl Lecoectwen seca 10
Chatard, Dr. Thomas M............ --XXVII, 60, 61
Chauvenet, W. M......... --- 25, 26, 28, 205, 208
Chemie work ..........20...c0c2s cece cceeee XXVIT
Chemical impregnations in artesian well
WAT OD sects Scrsis.sccocieateinea-ckwecabeice ine 166
Chemistry, Division of; administrative re-
eivinininiasuintattinisi diaiave'sta caeiee stabatie glee mies 59
--- 229

Chester, Prof. A. H., on Minnesota iron

OF8 ote vecs vacezen estan acces 204, 205, 206, 208, 212
Chicago artesian stream, Section........... 133
Chioccns, Andreas, Rational views of, on

the nature of fossils

TOGO: . ancaadewiennnnnvend
Valley. casio cha decemsctadeccecien
Chlorite Schists studied microscopically... 211
Chondrites antiqnisenccss cscs udesons ues 44t
Cialdi, Alessandro, cited as to waves..76, 80, 82, 88
Cincinnati group............-....0-.--..02. 182
Clarke, Prof. F. W .-...--..-.-.cecceeseanes XXVII
} administrative report.............. 59
Salem, on motion of Lyell glacier... 324
Classification of archwanrocks of the North-
Wests cosiseccoss ccc ceemar 209
fossil plants. . 403, 407, 422, 425-431
, Lindley & Hut-
ton on the.409-409
the Cryptogams 437-439
Clathrariaisssesessccuecrcs cecessivaeedeuaee 447
Clay slate from St. Louis River, Minnesota. 233
- near Mahtowah, Minn...... 233
studied microscopically.......... 210
Clearwater Lake graywacke.....-.--.-....
Cliff of differential degradation
, The Beabcvreeewscay oe re
StTOAM .... 20-2 e ee eee ee eee eee
Cliffs ...-....----.+--

, Comparison of...
Club-mosses..-..--..-----
Coal, Opinions on the origin of.

plants, Mode of growth of............ 400
Collecting area of artesian wells ... - 145
Colman, E. T., ascended Mount Baker. 341
Colonoceras .-......2-0. cee cece ee nce neeenes 255

456 INDEX.
Page.

Colorado River modified by artesian wells... 150

Colt: Tis: Divneivstiscewiswmectioneec sensansentes 9,14

Columbia County, Wisconsin .198, 223, 224, 233, 235

River modified by artesian wells. 150
Columna, Fabius, Rational views of, on the
nature of fossils......-.--..--+----2e2--++ 393
Compendium of Paleobotany, Preparation
Of Bic sae scetee 363
Conifers 433
, Development of the 447
Contents of Archwan Formations of North-
western States, paper on, by
R. D. Irving -..----+----+--++ 177
Conditions of artesian wells, a
paperon, byT.C.Chamberlin. 127
Dinocerata, a paper on, by 0. C.
Marshitscnevniasiaicte rat eiimieiness 245
Glaciers of the United States, a
paper on, by I. C. Russell..-. 305
Lake shores, 2 paper on, by G. K.
Gilbettsc2cccencwcce seeemeceee 71
Sketch of paleobotany, by Les-
ter F. Ward.-....---.-------- 859
Confining stratum above for artesian wells. 139
below for artesian wells. 138
Contrasted ratios of supply and demand of
WATER eos isas sincenewiod meee etree tecelses 148

Cook, George H.; conference on map.....- 39

Cope, E. D.; Wyoming fossils 251
Copper Rivet ......----------+------ 217
Corda, Angust Joseph, ....-2.s-2.00 augense 369
, Contributions of, topaleobotany 412, 417,418
, Sketch of .......0--.0---eeeeeeceneee 874
Cordaianthus Soiareig Se waial palsies sialere Sreisiateiereres 447
Cordaites ..------.+---++0+- 447
Cordaites ...---------.seeenee 447
Robbii ........-...- ~. 447
Cornwall, A. B.....-.--------- eee eee nee 62
Cornwall, England, echists 2....0...1.0.4+ 240
Corpuscula salina of Kircher - 390
Corrasion, Acceleration of . 117
Coryphodon......-.--..---+ .-251, 252
POOS jasinsicissirascs deleletmeccnesces 252
Cotta, C. Bernhard von, Contributions of, to
PRleOWOlADY secrneete=s cen csaeeyoeewacees
Cottonwood County, Minnesota. .
Coulée edge, The......-.......+
Cowlitz River runs from a glacier,
Glacier cos cincesiccceecedeieewceeeease

Cranial nerves, The. .
Credneria -. :
Cretaceous..........---

Crevasses in glaciers.......------.+----+---
Crichton, Sir Alexander; on the climate of

the antediluvian world. ..........-....--- 406
Crosnier, L ........-. 220
Cross, Whitman ... - XXIV, 44, 46, 216
Cry plogaminuioencnane uaeles ee Aaceiatan sen 432, 438
, Cellular .........--..---- 429, 438, 444
, Classification of the .
, Vascular -

Cucumites ........ fei

Cummins, R. T 2

Cup Butte, Lake Bonneville ...... masons

Currents, Off-shore .......-.-.-.2--- 2 eee eens

Da Costa, Emanuel Mendes, on the diluvian

origin of fossil remains. ...~......++------ 392
Dall, W. H., on glaciers of Alaska...--.-.. 358-355
Dana Creek ...-.------- seeeee rene cer eee rene 316

Glacier......-----.--- +062 --- eee cece ee 322

Prof. James D., cited on terraces . ...112, 236
Mount? ns -25cs2seescss acess 314, 315, 316, 317

Prof. Edward S...--..------------ XXII, 34
Dane County, Wisconsin, sandstone . ...... 235
Daniells, Prof. W. W .---.-------- 27, 28, 194
Daphnites 426
| Darwin, C 432
Dar wins. CxO vemwirwsccacweiecdaieinciatears widens XXX
Daubrée, A 220
D’ Aubuisson de Voisins on vegetable fossils. 403
Davidson County, Minnesota .......-..---- 200

, Prof. G.; Mount Rainier glacier .334, 335

found Aleutian glacier. 353

Davila, P. F., on the indigenous theory of
fossil plants clam neve pcaye Sh sures re noae trates cjelehe
Da Vinci, Leonardo, Rational views of, re-

lating to the nature of fossils

Davis: AiR swewecuncuien enews suede ecnetae

,C.D..-.
Dawes, H. L...-.---

Dawson, Dr.G.M ..

Dawson, Sir John William ....... ----..--.
, Contributions of, to paleobotany. 416, 424

5 SketeMoly. ws: steed esau eis B17

Debey, M. H., on the fossil plants of Aachen 421
De Candolle, A. P.; geographical distribu-

tion of plauts......- 366

; nervation of leaves... 381

Decline of flow in artesian wells .......... 157-165
Defrance, Jacques Louis Marin, Ccntribu-

tions of, to paleobotany.._....-..--------- 405
Degeneration theory of plants.-...-......-. 397
De la Beche; Sir Henry Thomas, Contriba-

tions of, to paleobotany ..-...-.---+ -+--- 405
Delta, The.....- 2.2... cece cee nnn e wenn 87, 90, 1¢4

POSS es saescicrecintjamamiewtetommmelemeeas 107
ideal section. - seeee 107
vertical section. .............-.- 107
Deluc. (See Luc.)
Deluge. (See Flood; Noachian Deluge.)
hypothesis ....-.......--....-.0--
Dendrolithus --.....

Descent of plants
Denver, Colo., artesian ayall: bres
Desor, E., cited as to wave action .....-.....
Development in vegetation
Devil’s Lake, Wisconsin.......
Devonian, Flora of the.........
Diabase defined...........--...
porphyrite defined

Diagrams illustrating the development of
plant life ...-......... «see. -361, 442

INDEX. 457
Diagrams, Discussion of. .. Division é Page.
; fe eee See eenet of Paleontology, Administrative re-
Diamond drill for artesian-wells. POPE iaiwiciecamseecvmcw sietexe 49-60
Peak glacier.... .....2..--.2..00. juaternary Ge stale:
Diastrophism as Telated to topographic re- _ trative clea eee 20-24
TICS sccmaeouslneananawes dais 76 the Pacific, Administrative re-
' Metined: s-ccecov seed cde tnace 118 port
Dioksonia, supposed fossil.................. 402 , The A’ppalachian.
Dicotyledons....... 0... ceee cece cece eene ee 429, 433 California ..
, Arrangement of the divisions Montana...
Of th Oy cue wwee ek watccasele 431, 450 New England
; , Development of the.......... 448, 449 Wrenn. cscvsuaeusaqees cele 10
Diller, Ones heseccumcecamaue + +-XXIII, 42, 236, 341 | Dodge County, Wisconsin ................- 199
Dinoceras beds.........2...sceeeeeceseeeeee 252 | Dossetter, E., photographed Alaska glaciers 352
lacustre weet ee teen ee ee eee e eee 251 | Douglas, BE. M -.... 22.2 ..eec cc eeeeee ee eees 11,12
laticeps .. +--- 251 / Drifting sand; dunes ....... --99, 100
mirabile Beteenececion --++ 251 | Drift, Shore...........0.5..00004 -. 86, 87
3 lower jaw .......... ---278-277 | Drill, Diamond, for artesian wells........... 169
Skul) ..... 0... ee eee ee 256 | Drilling, Interpretation of.............-..++ 172
; frontal bones .......... 260-262 Record of 170
3 lachrymal bones . 266 | Driven wells............ 170
; molar bones.... 265 | Dromocyou ......-2.20.- ce ccceeeececceeecce 255
; Maxillaries .. 266 | Dulac, Alleon, on the exotic character of the
; nasal bones............. 258 furns of Saint Etienne
j occiput .........2.2.... 263-265 | Duck Point, Grand Traverse Bay
; palate ....... 267-269 | Dunes.......2-..020-000.cececneeeeceeees 7,
3 palatine bone -. 269 | Dunker, Wilhelm, Contributions of, to pale-
j parietal bones . 260-262 Oot aR Yisrael base nas focus 419
; premaxillaries.......... 266 | Dunnington, A.F ........02.20-ceeeeees eee 5
} Prenasal bones.-........ 259 Dutton, Capt. C.E.... XXUL
+ pterygoid bones . 270-272 ; administrative report.. 42, 43
i Squamosal bones. . 269" |! Duval Si Ripe tre ccs toswcuewnenieeen meta ats 4,14
: VomeTs ........- c 272
# TOON cuir seein smiaed coicie 277 | Eagle Harbor, Michigan, Sandstone at ... .237-240
: Baking (15. Gs oc cae ccnwesesceeecitnwiemesca.
Earth augers.
; lower molars. -. shaping...
; Upper molars .. East Neebish Island .
SUDO Binsin erased BX aimtlodnmmmnmenene Eau Pleine River............2. 002s eee eee ee
first found Echo River quartzite..........20----eseeees
, The fore limbs of.. Eccles, James; citedon Wind River glaciers 345
i Eimbeck, W.; as to Jeff Davis glacier. ... 342, 343
Dioonites .......-..-.0--02-0005-- Bile Rivet <.essseccseacesteuiessese ace
Diorite defined Ellis, William
Diplacodon beds .......-....-..--.2.+.----- 252 | Embankments
Director, Report of the. XVI-XXXvI | Emergence, Submergence and, of shores... 110
Dirt-bands in glaciers .. 319 | Emmons, 8. F.... . ibistas el wiaietatetced XVIII, XXIV, 9
Discrimination of shore features, The 112 ; administrative report .......-..-.. 43-47
Discussion of diagrams of the development quotes Gen. Kautz on glaciers..... 335
of plant life ....---...--2.--------e cece 4438-452 on glaciers, Mount Rainier. ........ 335
Distribution of wave-wrought shore feat- Empedocles on the origin of vegetable life. 393
MLCS ison Sonics esse 101-103 | Empire Biuff, Lake Michigan .............. 93, 103
wells, Advantageous .-.... 156 | Endogenites .......-...+---+-eeeeee eee eeee 408, 428
. District of Columbia, Work in ..-.......--.- 8 | Engelhardt, H., Paleobotanical work of .... 424
the Great Basin .........-......- x1x | Engler on the geographical distribution of
PAG C iccsscercss xeelauaisialersiaieeg xIX PATI juieescisiwinse biel cis icin eiGinrnialate nimietetclenmreicie 366
Diversity of rock texture causes irregularity Enlargement of feldspar fragments in cer-
in erosion. ....--.... 2-20-20 -- 22-2 - eee eee ee 15 tain Keweenawan sand-
Division, General organization of the geo- SLOUES 5 os ok sesso ee, 237-245
ETAPNIC2 26: ccc secre soecessases 3 mineral fragments in cer-
of Chemistry, Administrative re- tain detrital rocks. ...... 218
Port. coseerecwese es 59 | Eobasileus .......-....... 251
Geography, The .. ..--.-.-.-- 3-14 | Eopteris Morierii 445
Mining Statistics and Technol- ‘Eozoon Canadense 444,
Ds vainiir nen kwreewnnamnns 63-64 | Ephedra antisyphilitica..............------ 433

458 INDEX.
Page. Page
Equalization of supply in wells.....-......- 149 | Flowers, Fossil.......-...2-0.-22-s-000 396, 404, 426
Equisetaces ...-.. 22-2. 020020 sees eeeeee = 445 | Folded Schists north and east of Lake Su-
Equisetiner .-.........22202 ceceee eee eee 4°3 DOVOR ce occd cosets ed ciciccedcis we sauinetemte 205
, Development of the... 445 | Fontaine, W.M.; work in the fossil floras of
EQUiS@bUID -)<aissarccicieia nase craisiainawiewiaicreloncies’s 438 VAP Bia ociciayn airs aravaten ie tarsicioton alanis arcles 424
giganteum 398 | Forbes, Prof. J. L., an authority on glaciers .309, 319
Equivalency of Penokee and Marquette Fore limbs of Dinocerata, The ............ 298-300
TOGKS? 2 ivincinas cet tosmscen sind, Seheeoeeue ¢ 195 | Fossil fauna of Eocene lake region, Wyo-
Eratosthenes on the significance of fossil Ming -...-..-.- 2.2. ee eee 250
SNES: occ ds coiee me cremennmetaseumeelaone 386 Western Americaolder than

Erni, Dr. Henrt..ece2: s<sceccee ctrwdncenee es 60
Eruption causes irregularity of erosion .... 76
Eruptive origin of certain Huronian rocks. 242
Escape of water at levelslower thanthe well 153
Essential features of artesian wells.-....-. 131-173
Ettingshausen, Baron Constantin von, Con-
tributions of, to paleobot-

any-...
, Discoveries of, in phytogeog-

TAPHY o- sstcagiesseien Lecce 366

, Rank of, asa paleobotanist.368, 369

OK OEGDY OF osieieeceveiwisianeterdye 380

Eureka, Nevada, sandstone......-.2--.--... 235

Existing glaciers of the United States...... 303

ExOg@enites .cccwaesccecentawesuseewesenenss 428

Exotic theory of fossil plants .. ...... 396, 397, 427

Extermination theory of fossil plants ..... 396, 398
Extinct species, Fertility of the conception

Off, scseticicien aisle visiecinistoayaisicictieroisiseeueerctarste 398
Paivchild; Bilis cssceisieeanvicns ooeeevete ag 18
Farmington, Utah; view of Wasatch Mount-

VATS) tes sees ete ors is att Aes ots on toate ten, 114
Faujas-de Saint Fond, Barthélemy, Contri-

butions of, to paleobotany.........--... 400, 402
Fault scarp, The .......-.-.-----.2-----00- 113-115

scarps and shore lines at the base of
the Wasatch ......---...-...2--06-- 114
WOTTACES qenemnsetieseeceaysl Uadeesies 118
Fauna, Fossil, Eocene lake region, Wyo-

MUGS csecicdi ss beraaaetinegeimed ccm csie! 250
MOY), Mescsciain csiciacs patel avevainisheticwisrciseteiniaain een 28
Felsites and felsitic porphyries studied mi-

Croscopicall y's .csccewccscserse cess eaeaees 214
Wermsc:s<cncseossseeute caus Segeder sews 432

, Development of the......-..-. 445
, Early appearance of ..........--.... 445
Ferruginous Schists of the Black River Val-

ley, WisCODSi Do 6icciiccsicciic cewdumscedie ns
TFicoides............--

Filices ...
BCI OS scr oie Serene oie

Financial statement

Fissured and channeled water-bearing beds. 135
Wla bell aria: ictsinicicsrocidrcrouis aecineteelan! sisters 428
Flathead Mountains, Glaciers of .-........ 347
Bleteher. Dh: Crs aenc ecient ces cas 7
Flood plains and stream terraces........... 116

theory of fossil remains..... 390, 391, 397, 398

, Defenders of the. . . .392, 393, 402, 408
; Different ways in which fossil
plants were explained by the 395,398

Flow, Control of, in wells...--............2. 157
, Height of, in artesian wells........... 159
;Methods of increasing, in artesian

WIS. a isractasisrewnrecidiowsiste’s . seams see 154

in corresponding rocks in

other hemisphere........
floras, Conditions affecting
flowers
fruits
glaciers in Alaska........---..----
TOA VOBie ec oneeenewee ies < yoaiece
plants; number of known species at

different dates ..407, 416, 417, 421,

422, 424, 428

; how preserved.........----- 439

TODS. sie Docc emicwemesGmncwmcetecs 426

BEANE ec cjidenSiciersiacacigeicaices wiecsseisei 426

UNCOS Soi eiicrcistdcecekecmdwles eceieeie 426

426

Fossils, Early theories of the origin of ... 389, 390

Foster and Whitney cited.....-..-.......-- 191

Richard: 22.25. cseeesccasceeetceices 55, 56

Fountain head of artesian wells.........-.- 144
Fracastorius, Rational views of, on the na-

GUTOSOL LOSSES ect ie cnicjcsodisicreca come tale 399

Fragaria, Supposed fossil ........----..---- 395

Franklin, Sir John ..-..--..--.---.0--00- eee 354

Fremont’s Peak glacier ........-......2--- 344-347

Friction in artesian wells ........-.--...-.- 157

Fumaria, Supposed fossil ...-...----..-..-. 396

Gabbro defined ........-..- 22-22 eee eee eee 215

Gallium (=Galium), Supposed fossil....... 396

Gamopetale .........------22- see ee eee eee 433, 450

, Position of the.............. 431, 450

Gannett, Heury.....-....-. 2-22-22 .eee-. ee 35

; administrative report..... 3-14

SiS sucinccisce nahaourteieistecinteaed 4, 5,12

Gannister of Yorkshire .--............... 219, 222

. Marquette, Mich............. 225

Gardner, T.C., on ice blades -
Garlick: SAvocsccsacd caretcawlagees _
Garrett, LeRoy M......-.......--..00.0----
Geiger; HiR: ce enscsseaeiweevercee sc cses RAVI BD

Geiit6) Ween occ: acenaes 210, 227, 228, 236
, on terraces....... 112
Geinitz, Hans Bruno 369
, Contributions of, to paleobotany.. 412
se SE cece seca ease ale apes 374
General organization of the geographic di-
WISIOM Soca cre cse cisions serene Speed ks nie eset 3
Generatio equivoca, Doctrine of ........... 386
Genetic problems in Notthwest Archwan.. 185
Geognostico-botanical view of the plant-life
OL TG SONG x cohyenukn kee twennwnsieidinemw 439
Geographical distribution of plants ........ 366
Geography, Division of ............2....22. 3-14
Geologic map of Northwest, Preliminary .. 187

the United States, Prelim- .
ALY wv cccenmn amie lemned XXVIII

INDEX,

Page.

Geologic record, Defectiveness of the, in fos-
sil plants ............ 22.00.04. 439, 450
WOPK? so scteateacciseies aa Seciaescieciace XX
Geological report of Wisconsin, cited ...... 199
Geology and biology, Interrelations of ..... 3638
OE Canada, P1060 eos ce isew een eco 187

, Origin of the science of strati-
graphical «- 898

Gerhard, C. A... 2.22... cece ence eee 219
Germar, E. F., on the Carboniferous flora of
Wettin and Libejiin -... 2.2.2.2 .2.2.. 22. 416
Germ-theory of the origin of fossils . - 389, 390
Gesner on petrified wood........-. - 888, 391
Gibraltar Bluff, Wisconsin. ... sister 224

GING A NE esos oe nis bisa KXVI, 53

Gigantic mammals of the Dinocerata....... 243
UO, Gi Re eres wees ace ner sd aawaadaes XXII
; administrative report....... 30-34
. as to Jeff Davis glaciers .... 343

; the topographic features of
lake shores ............-.. 69, 123
; Visited glaciers of U.S...... 315
Glacial motion; Muir cited ...... 22.0.2... 324
Glacial phenomena....._........22...-206. 317-323
3 Prof.T.C.Chamberlin. xxt
records, Natwre Of oc scss.004 cesses. 313
Glaciated surfaces 322

Glaciation causes irregularity of erosion ... 76
Glacier, Bolten... 2.2.2. caneevacevee: 333, 334
movements measured

MUG wees cceetewewseeeues
PADIS eho wer eure uate vanes pelmas
; largest found ......-...-....
on Parker Creek glacier. 319
oy WS 18:8 occcrcicceacesees
Glaciers, Alaska .....
, Aleutian
PAIPING «oon js csi acseOeeeceseeee dan
, Ancient, of the Sierra Nevada. 327
, Characteristics of 309
, Continental. .... 309
Crevasses of..........0.--ceceesee 318
Definition of........2....022.-..-5 311
, Dirt bands on... 319
; Elevation of, in the High Sierra.. 315
, Existing, of the Sierra Nevada... 314
, Fossil, in Alaska.................- 859
in the Wind River Mountains.... .826

, Mount Jefferson
Shasta

the Cascade Mountains.....-..
Sierra Nevada.-....-.......

319
United States, Existing. . 303-355

Glossopteris Phillipsii .......-...........-. 417
Gneisses studied microscopically -......... 213
Gnetacese ....---cccee cccae cere ce cee ec eene 433, 448
Gogebic formation ........22. -1.-eeseeeeeee 193

Lake .....- - -194, 195, 196
Gooch, Dr. F. A., ....-.------- -- XXVII, 19, 60

Goppert, Heinrich Robert, Contributions of,
to paleobotany. ...412, 414, 415, 416, 418,
419, 421, 422, 423
, Rank of, as a paleobotanist . .368, 369, 411
pOROtch Of 28 ccicjcceswaciekiceiecerccu 373

Page.
Gore, Prof. J. Howard....... esaeteceseeeee XVII, 6
Grand Cafion of the Colorado ... 118, 234
Marais ...........000.0...., sss 207
Portage Bay, Lake Superior ........ 203
Rapids, Wis., Potsdam sandstone.... 224
TORY SG esas vaeceae'aeacticd. comseaccas 397

; investigations into the Car-
boniferous floraof France. 424
Grandfather Bull Falls.......... Baciacisicciimbe 194

Granger, E., on coal plants at Zanesville,

OWI0 ee ceria aie eas alisnicrevant cencenterardiocien es 404
Granites studied microscopically... - 213
Grant County, Wisconsin, sandstone....... 255
Gray, Asa, on the geographical distribution

Of Plantes cose cece sensimacetieuceeuvaes 366, 436

Gray wackes ... 210, 231, 232, 234

Great Basin, Glaciers on mountains of -. 842
Salt Lake, Sheep Rock............... 84
Green River series ......-.........- 2. 249, 252; 254
Greenstones studied miscroscopically...-.. 214
Greywackes. (See Graywackes .)
Grisebach, A. H. R., on the geographical dis-
tribution of plants ..................... -. 866

Griswold, W. T

Guy 06, Ae ec eaielone de baeeie niacin ersistonec

Gymmosperms .........2...00000ceeeeeseeee
Hackett, Merrille........22.....0.000. c20e 7
Hagen, K. G., on the origin of amber...... 403
Hague, Arnold................2002.--- XX, 216, 221
, cited on Mount Hood glacier ...... 339

; Yellowstone National Park Survey. 15-19

fag hits D Wee c anion saewiewsmetis onsejccsnsicer oes 28
Hall, C.W .-.... t eateie eieiSaiciatis 26, 28, 197, 201, 202, 208
, Prof. James; conference on map..... 39

, Report of,on fossil plants

of Fremont’sexpedition 417
, W. H., on artesian wells............-. 151
Hallock, Dr. William............. XXVIII, 15, 16, 62
Happer, John §..... -... cece eee cen e ee eee 7
TIA OS, 2G Wiscnccte sarin sania vine wevectan isis 214, 236
Hayden, E. E., U. 8. N., Diagrams prepared
DY sepiet sex Ree Hoc eete su 42, 58, 442
DPR Vi seca cecedeeicse cess XXJ, 202, 377
; administrative report... 28-30
» on glaciers..........-.-. 344
Heer, Oswald, Contributions of, to paleo-
; botany ........2..0. wen. 419, 424
; geographical distribution of plants.. 366
, Rank of, as a paleobotanist......... 368, 369
» Sketeh Of: cccewcwsvcecwaicee 378
Heliobatis beds .. 252
Helaletes 2scexe seen seoeesege cess - 255
Henry Mountain sandstone, Utah...-...... 235

Herodotus on the meaning of fossil shells 386,398

Hester, W. B ......---..-. wibelwichp clara ieiaceemets 13
Heyl, A.B. 14
Highter.......---------.. 413
Hillebrand, W. F ......-..0-.0..02. 20-0 XXIV. 46
Hillera, SK ccc scncceccinnisweteeweseveedens §8
Hind limbs of Dinocerata. . - -300-302
Hippuris, Supposed fossil 396, 401

460 INDEX.
Page. Page.
Historical review of paleobotanical dis- Irving, Prof. R. D., on an investigation of
CONOR Y -<iccinlasuinednisiaitiestasaewcoaee sae 368 the Archean formations of the North-
Hiteheoek; Pre. Th cc cnwakonensccnenes XXVIII, 35 western States .......-..-22.-0-eeeeeeee: 175-242
, E., on terraces 112 | Ishpeming .-.....
Hoff, K. E. A. von, on petrified wood --.-..-- 402 | Isoetes........
Hotfmian; Ce¥ esscenceesasaceossesdeceveces Ives’s expedition .--..........2..-----0-2-- 382
OUD): veleie sie han tesrconadseine? s
Holman, age cee 0 RNS GCE Sans ¥>) Jackson County, Wisconsin, sandstone.... 235
Holmes, W. H., on glaciers - cs aE nd ee a 15,16
Bole rccrs as : al Si ie Foaacth Taco; Hrm est aciscasevecswasse snr seescences 43
Hook, Robert, sete Peete ven neme 393 Jaeger, Georg Friedrich, Contributions of,
ure Oo oar ee ee eS
t GOD OtANY eocnmrasenirieen Geese We 406
Hooked Spits, The, produced by wave ac- ee SMa kcke eae 998 999
HON esis tee i fe oo 95-96 | se Davis Peak MLACIOR: co cee sonia seiaes 842, 343
Hookers: 3: D., = a geographic distribu- gna Jefferson County, Wisconsin...........-.-. 199
jas on ja ones ib it cee f ae 41 John, Dr. J. F., on amber .-.-...--.--.------ 403
a8 Pa eobotanica contributions of ... 2 TOL MGOH LAG peck tect actremie te aeteea it XXxvI, 51
Hopkins, W., cited as to current power -..- 89 W.D X1x, 30, 31,32 34, 315
SPN a ihe in einsmimietesminie sate 9 BU, U1, Oey OF,
Hornblende-gabbro Motined onsinkchaseatias Jukes, Prof. J. B., cited on schist........--. 241
er ae cic tge een car Saad sig | Julien, A. A., clted.-........-....----.102, 244, 215
Min PRG Ny MOUND seaie ve stats steve as Juneau County, Wisconsin...........-.---- 223

Hunt, T.S., on geologic formations ....188, 196, 203
Haron, Lake..181, 185, 186, 189, 190, 195, 196, 204,
210, 216, 218, 224, 225, 226,
227, 228, 230, 231, 236, 237

Huronian areas, Investigations in .-.. -.-.. 187
; The original, of Murray
and Logan --- 187
formation ......... 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, _

188, 190, 194, 195, 196,

199, 201, 202, 203, 204,

205, 206, 209, 2:0, 211,

212, 215, 216, 218, 220,

222, 228, 224, 225, 226,

227, 228, 229, 230, 231,

234, 236, 237

.Metamorphism in.... 241

Hutton, J.; Plutonian theory. .
Hyatt, Prof. Alpheus ..-.--.....-..2-----.. 54

Hydro-mica-schists studied microscopically. 212
HS Ops0ds: anieceencsucecocesceecuseeaaecs 255
FISTaAch US sce cnecssencrseccincnwece scien 255
Ice pyramids, Glacial ..........---2..----- 320, 321

TONLUCS .--- eee eee cece eee cence ce nes 323
Ice-work the shore wall.....-..,.....-----+ 109

Iddings, J.P .-15,18, 19, 216, 221
Tllustrations accompanying sketch of paleo-

Dotan ns. cjsiswaricseacoeuunierstcnnise serpent 361
Imperatus on the diluvian origin of fossil re-
mains 391

Indigenous theory of fossil plants. .395, 396, 426, 427

Interdependence of botany andpaleobotany. 366
parts in beach forma-

iO saceneyoweecisetuas 83, 87

Tnterrelations of geology and biology ...... 363

Invertebrate paleontology.....---.....-.--+ 363
Investigation of Northwestern Archean

formations, Scope of ...--.....2..---.25.- 181

Iron River silver belt ......--..--.--.s0--06 228

Trrigation by artesian wells ...... .-.......
Irving, Prof. R. Di cccscsvercvecwistsceseeses xxIt
; administrative report... 24-28

Jussieu, Adrien de, mothod of... -423, 431, 435

,A.L., Method of.......-..---. 423, 431, 434
Antoine de, on the exotic character
of the coal
plants of Saint
ts Chaumont ... 397
possible extinc-
tion of plants. 398
Jussieu, Bernard de, Arrangement by, of the
plants in the garden of the Trianon...-.. 425
Kame, The, or Osar, contrasted with shore
THUG OS vp jacs 2 cisheisiew cacinssiarawe: pesleciocciniceisGaeiinicie 121
Karl, Anton ............-.---.+--XVIU, 9, 44, 45, 46
Kautz, General August V., found glaciers
on Mount Rainier ...-..........-222---.. 334, 335
Keller, H., cited on formation of beaches .-. 77
Kentmann, Johannes, on leaf-incrustations
TD TULA o se canisicececeesiane: sacieesemeenjecee 389
Kerr, Mark B... raat 13
. -- XVI, 4,5
Kettle River sevseess 197
Keweenaw Point, Michigan ...... 223, 228, 234, 235
Keweenawan rocks .-.... 182, 184, 185, 195, 201, 202,

203, 218, 214, 215
Kieser, Dietrich Georg, on the structure of

coniferous W00d....-.....0.-..200- ee eee ee 402
King, Clarence 47
; Mount Shasta glacier -.... 329

pe MOUN Gs soe.cc5-tereisaisinte teedenacindce’ ale 314
Kingfisher Lake.............. 186, 207, 208, 210, 234
Kircher, A.; theory of the origin of fossils. 390
Kirehner Dik eesenceeceewesesteenaacccecs 382
Klein, Balthasar, on petrified wood........ 389
, Rational views of ....... 393

Knife Lako..........--...
Kéchlin-Schlumberger
Konwakiton glacier.......--.....2.2..2.025

Kotzebue Sound glaciers --.............-... 354
Kriiger, Johann Gottlob, on vegetable fos-

i 403
Kundmann J. C., Rational views of, on the

nature of fossils..............0.. 02. c0ee 394

INDEX. 461
Page. Page.
Kurr, Johann Gottlob, on the Jurassic flora Leibnitz, G. W., on the nature of fossils.... 394
of Wiirttemberg .............0...000..... 416 , The “Protogwa” of .............. 399
Kutorga, S.; contributions to paleobotany. 415 | Leidy, J., Wyoming fossils +251, 255
Lemuravis: yepcsiis ee vos ve dc .c: wpedcoweates 255
Lachmund, F., on the cause of petrifaction. 390 Leonhard, K.C. von .........22..eecceceeeee 400
Lake, Agamok ....... 222... ..c eee eee eee 207 | Lepidodendron.............22. 0. c2..2.e 433, 438
, Basswood. 205, 207, 208 established by Sternberg.... 428
, Big Stone. § PRR cece ccccmenn doom 421
Bonneville ........... Lepidophytes ..........2...2.cccceeseeee eee 438
; An island of .. Lepidosteus...... 2... ....22.002 cece sees 255
, cliffs and terraces of .-.98, 99,110 | Lesley, J. Peter; conference on map....... 39
3 Cup Butto .....2... 2.22... 96 | Lesquereus, Leo, Collection from........... 57
# PIE OF a dada de wcdadarmn 98 , Contributions of, to paleo-
shore; map........... 20000. 95 botany..... 416, 420, 424, 445, 446
Clear Water ......-.....2..ccceeceeeee 234 , Rank of, as a’ paleobotan-
AUIS scrcrcnina vaio Lew rauaiy ewetrces 223 ISte: cesweescusensearsned 368, 369
Gogebie .........00. 0c eee 194, 195, 196 Sketch of ..........2.22-. 3768
, Great Salt, Sheep Rock...... eaters 84 | Lesser, Friedrich Christ., on the tropical
Huron - 181, 185, 186, 189, 190, 195, 196, 204, 210, facies of fossil plants .............-...2..- 397
216, 218, 225, 226, 227, 228, 230, 231, 236, 237 | Lherozite defined ........-..-..ee-e--ecee0- 217
, Kingfisher.............. 186, 207, 208, 210, 234 | Lhwyd, Edward, on fossil plants .......... 389, 425
gp RDO: erent sees 186, 207, 208, 210, 227, 234 , on the origin of fossils... 340, 391
; Michigan; rectification of coast- ‘map. 103 | Libavius, Germ theory of, for the formation
pM OTROS ec5s icc peinsoe Visecroceisios aanslstaed 197 of fossils 389, 390
4 MONO: coavadactaxasss 314, 315, 316,317 | Library ....2. 2.2.2. 0-20 ee cece ee cece eceeeee XXIV
pMOO8C we cea denies earecimsnice ce ccsees 213) |) Toigulatae s.2csc.0c evade earns ieeces cn 433, 438, 446
DAN suing en vedo waserenrenw nd 233 | Limbs of Dinocerata, The fore ........... 298-300
SNotthitecs: cha scuccucer ecanecowees 204 , The hind.. . 300-302
Numakagon. .:.ci0ccessccesvacsescecs 198 | LapOStOn68).cccceccdeneneewe : 218
of the Woods....... ae 182, 205,208 | Limnohyus...-.......-00-seeeeee 255
,Ogishkiemuncie .................... 207: | Tot vOFelis cates:acats crersrcap, oa seaweueenaye ees ale 255
Ontario, Map of Braddock’s Bay...... . ~94 | Lincoln Peak; Newadac. 2c o..cseavscreneens 342
POWERS! ine acca tesweieccaslaanenen 314 | Lindley and Hutton; classification of fossil
(ARON is cjassista- seietantinaisalnraruatsrates sees 233 plants............. 429, 430
, Saganaga -. --+-203, 204, 205, 207, 215 ; fossil flora of Great
» Seneca, deltas.............-..----2--5 108 Britain 2.022000 2% 408
shores, The topographic features of... 69 on the mode of growth
Superior............ 182, 184, 192, 196, 201, 208, of coal plants.....-. 400

204, 206, 207, 209, 211, 215,
217, 218, 231, 233, 234, 235

, Head of; map........---...- “94
, trough synclinal ............ 198
TAO G’ ofasoic1 5:3. cjaieye|atwiniogeyatbre oie Sloss eusioieimreie 814
, Teal, Michigan. . 232
Lamination of glaciers .. 318
‘Land sculpture, composite asian of. 5 75
terrace, Tho...... 2.2.0.2. eee eee eee 118
Landslip cliff, The ......-..22-22.0--ceeeeee 115
Landslips in Marsh Valley, Idaho.......... 120
Lange, Nicholas, on the origin of fossils... 390
, indigenous theory of fossil plants... 396
Lasanlx,, As Von 2200 ccs sce cecwnccwsiecnces 219, 220
DIPULON AD cia niches siseiicieiee Fenle, CGecduicces 185
Lawrence, P. H...........- 219
Leakage, Lateral, in wells 157
Le Conte, J., cited on Lyell glacier.....-. 325, 326
Leevining Creek glacier......-.....---.--0: 316

Lehmann, J. G., on the supposed fossil Aster
montanus.... -.--------- 396

, Services of, to stratigraphic
Geology.-...--..---eeceee 299

Leibnitz,G.W.; great physical changes in
the earth....... ..--.--- 398

, on exotic character of fossil
plants....-...-.--..-.--- 396

, Skeptical views of. . .409, 410
Lines ofdescentinthedevelopmentof plants, 452
Linnean system of botanical classification, 433, 434
Lister, Martin, Rational views of, on the na-

turevof fossil®: sicccccseccs weas es vee gence: 294
Lithanthracites: 202. saslencecsssceceneceees 427
TiMODUb aie 6 oles ccc eiowe ee eined weisnie 426
Lithocalmi ... 426
Lithocarpi . 426
Lithodendron <2. 02 ences seeciecoscet eens 426
Lithophylla .... 426
Lithophylli. .- 426
Lithophyllon . ‘ a 426
TAthOv by. b68). cceicsncss-cyaswctadaaisie niela-se annie sicrwlosevers 426
Lithoxs thes cccisccoveceaiecd wt mmaivicnsweieacemeie 427
LATOR Ot ween Reeder 425, 426
Little Falls, Minn.... ~-197, 212, 218
Little Fork River 206
Little Iron River, Michigan; graywacke... 234
Littoral current ........-..0.000 0. --ee eee eee 85

deposition... -- 90-100
12) 02) (6) | See ee ee ee 80-85
transportation.........-. 85-90
Lizard district, Cornwall, England ........ 240

Logan, Sir W.E. ; geological map of Canada
CibEM werrscncec ziemecielesier 2 181, 188, 189, 226
, Murray and

462 INDEX.
Page, Page.
Loop, The, in wave action....-.......----- 91,95 | Martins, C. ¥., Contributions of, to paleo-
Los Angeles County, California; artesian DOtany:: ss vecceceese esses 405, 428
PONS ay veered eaeaee eae ewes Hee 151 ; Classification of fossil plants .... 428
Loss of flow in wells (see Decline of flow).157-165 | Maryland, work in 8
Levene, Dt Bo ven qewws aeeeescy 40 | Massalongo, Abrams, Contributions of, to
Loxalophodon........----+--+-- 251 paleobotany......- 423
Luc, J. A. dO ..2 eee e cece eee eee ee cere e ee 219 , Rank of, as a paleobotanist. .368, 369
Luidius (see Lhwyd.) , Sketch of.... ... --.-.-.-..-- 379
Luther, Martin, the first to assign the flood Matthiolus on petrified wood .---888, 390, 391
as the cause of petrifactions......--...-.. 391 | Measurement of flow in artesian wells ...-.. 159
Lycopodiacem........-...-.-.-- 3 AEG: | Med WNOS i ood tain aosecioe aeeee wish 446
Lycopodines ...-.....--+---+-- = 433 | Meehan, Thomas; cited on Alaskan glaciers 353
Lycopodinesw, Development of the --- 446 | Melville, Dr. W. H -...-0---2. 22-02 XXV, 48
Lycopodiolithes.....-..-.---------00-----+ 427,428 | Menominee, Marquette and, iron-bearing
Lycopodites: .-.-0<cc<ssseewsciseesscseeeis 428 POSION srsdscccwccueees 189-194, 234
Lycopodium ...-...---.----.-+--20- 2. eee eee 438 190
Lyell glacier ......---..--. 0. sees eee eee 322 rocks... 183, 187, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196,
323 203, 204, 207, 210, 211, 218, 228
LOUIE ccaiicienacaatmiitnt tak dese $14 .815|, Merced River. oc caiscedsincaieciardiacagmeeidondk 315
ptr Charles visciccteisas wevederstieed eee 879 | Merret, Christopher, Rational views of, on
the nature of fosslls......-----.----.----- 394
McGee, W J...- -+-.+-XVIII, XXIU, XXVIII, 417 | Merriam, W.N .----..--.--- 24, 25, 27, 28, 188, 197,
, Administ ative report ....-.. 34-41 201, 202, 203, 205
McKays Mountain, Lake Superior ......... 203 | Mesabi Range ...---.....-.-.2-24- 197, 204, 205, 206
MeWinney, Rei ©: ances cccecciacieccean-ceccncees 5 | Metamorphism in the Huronian .........-. 241
McLaughlan, Maj. J....--- 23 | Mica schists studied microscopically....... 212
McLennan’s Landing .......- 225 | Microscopic studies --...
Macomb’s Expedition .... 382 | Michigamme Lake .......
MEAMIS ONY WASH ic « ceisineintens ssi el eioiacpuaiaiotostes 223 MIHO)sc sede AGS ee Ssake ees
Malitowah, Minn .....-... .22.2-2---..----- 233 | Mille Lacs County, Minnesota
Major, Johann Daniel, first to mention true Tak Guscseiud: oer odsse Sstvlaces
leaf impressions in Miller, Hugh
TOCK o2e.s seteeses 389,425 | Mineral production of the United States...-xxvll
, Rational views of ..389, 393 | Mining districts, Survey of ....-.......---- XXIV
Mammals, Gigantic Dinocerata ............ 243 statistics and technology, Division
Mankato, Minn ...........2....00e00e0eeee 202 OO Becta dre tepioecoe enc otar tart Reet oheals tee Ae
Mantell, G. A.; ‘Fossils of the South Minnesota River .....-.
DOWNS cnccseecinsroedats ieeiseewemeehes te 405 Valley ....
Manuscript geologic map United States... . 35 | Miohippus series..-.............-..-------.
maps used in forming United Miquel, F. A. G.; monograph of the Cyca-
States geological map.... ... 38 CACC eo:e sees retrevaincieteeiete vemnaeeee ees 415
Maps, Canadian......-.....2..-..-..--22225 182 | Mississaugi River ...... 2... -.-------..- 182, 197
used in forming United States geolo- Mississippi River......-...2..-2-. 187, 197, 205, 210
@ical Map scscessscs ce cesses eee 37 | Missouri River modified by artesian wells.. 150
Marathon County, Wisconsin ..........-... 194 | Mitchell, Dakota..--.......-...-0 2.2.2.0 -- 280
Marcou,.J 2B ssecie sicnigiePageis scaceaGiatsices 50 , Prof. Henry, cited on tide-lands... 77
jPROE: DF cwieinneice ve been Shdcdeaetoeee 54,378 | Modified system of botanical classification
Mare’s tail (Hippuris), supposed fossil .-... 396 PHOPOSEd) se cwcsSessnses saws semen. Bese 436-437
Marion, Prof. A.F 3841 | Moering, Paul Gerard, on the indigenous
Marck, W. von de 424 theory of fossil plants ..........2..2-2-..- 396
Marquette .and Menominee iron-bearing Mono Basin 328
BOTLCO 2c aweseaseecnsscseees 189-194 Dake glacier 2:2). icecesasieceteeaecss 314, 315
County, Michigan..............- 235 | Monochlamydew.........-..--.....--. 433
Rogion....183, 187, 189,190, 192, 193,195, | Moenocotyledone ..s0.+ o2ccccensaew eu cena re 429, 433
196, 198, 203, 204, 207, 210, 211, , Development of the 448
212, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 224, | Monopetala .....-.-...2.. 002 ee ee eee 433
225, 228, 229, 230, 231, 285 | Montana Division, The .....-.............-. 9
Marsh, Prof. 0, C..-.-.--.-.062-2--20-- XXv, 11,12 | Montaniri first announced potency of cur-
; administrative report. ..49-50 rents with waves.......----..--0--eeeeeee 88
; gigantic dinocerata.. 243-302 | Montreal River.........-...-...-. 195
Marshall Hill, Wis... -.--..------------2-- 228 | Moody County, Dakota 200
Marsh Valley, Idaho, landslipsin ........-. 120 | Moose Lake, Wisconsin .......-..- .2-.222.. 213
MAT IIG: sisesejascercsorcisioe tiers Aaisie diane de 432, 438,446 | Moraines .......--..----...-----0-- 120, 121, 312, 321
WON di Obevienscamrereasercinatsinnarecconaien 446 | Morand,J.F.C., Rational views of, on the
Martin, William; ‘'Petrificata Derbiensia” 402 HAturciof fossils: oo cscs ec aeas dsccwmmeses 394

~

INDEX. 463

Page. Page.

MOPI6TG i 33sec ccccecisncecack hoemecemenesne 245 | Nicollet County, Minnesota ....... 202, 223, 238, 235
Morris, John; catalonna of British fossils .. 415 | Nilsson, Sveno, on the fossil plants of

Morrison County, Minnesota ...... ....... 200, 208 SWCD oes sy re wie ere siaciciewnce cones, «0-403, 405

Moscardus, Ludovicus, Rational views of, on Nipigon Bay, Lake Superior; sandstone.... 234

the nature of fossils Nisqually River runs from a glacier........ 335

Mongeot,: Avec jecsauauas segueviineensieinaensa PIACIOD cousvcecteves decaceus cue 836

Mountain Lake graywacke ....
Mount Baker glaciers ...........
Conness........--......
Dana

PI MOLOD sa 1s:n civieiesasbiele: tyarshicvesnarbewree

Hood glacier.......
Mount Humphreys........
Jefferson glacier...

PR Fe areas ncrcwausuan apavalacese Miaaedans

McClure

Moran glaciers ..........22-2...26--
Rainier glacier .-

FUGUE Sensis sees
BIACIORS 3 .c.4c.cccscaeenecceeed
Shasta glacier .....-........2.-..-. 329-334
Ted SUOW sessis w2eeciseessss 323
St. Elias glaciers... 848, 353
Tachoma. (See Rainier.)
WiHI6Y .)coconeseccc nseceacheenes 314
Whittlesey quartzite............... 232

Muir, John, on California glaciers. .... 324, 325, 826
rate of flow of Mount Mc-

Clure glacier -....--..... 322

Minster, Count of; ‘ Beitiige zur Petrefac-
tenkunde” 412
Murlin, A. E 57
Murray, A., cited on Huronian 188
Murray and Logan.....-..-...-..+-.- 187
MUPPISRY SD! (5:00. .uoseaeeawawiae geceewis on; ustaiels 220

Mylius, G. F., on the diluvian origin of fos-
sil remains .......---.--..0eeee- eee eeenes
Myrrh; supposed fossil...

Nathors!,G.; investigations into the fossil

flora of Sweden ....-.-...-..----- 2.2.20 424
Natural method in botanical classification... 431
Nature-printing, Invention of .....--.....-. 380
Naturselbstdruck, Invention of .-.........- 380
Nau, B.S. von, Contributions of, to paleo-

botany ..--.-.- 2 mia icine raat 404
Naumann, C. F 219
Neebish Island, Saint Mary’s River, quartz-

ALO: 2 ii5.d crc vsie winrdSinislacewicisicic,Siebigine sii eeceysyaier 231
Neptunian theory of Werner..........----. 398
Nervation of leaves, Study of - .-.380, 412, 419, 420
Nerves, The cranial ...........-.--..--0.--- 285
i 318
Newberry, Dr. J. S....--...------2--- eee eee 54, 369

; observed glaciers in Oregon .-.. 341

, Paleobotanical investigations of 424

; Sketehi of..-5222ss23seseceesics 381

New England Division, The.........----.-. 3,4
Lisbon, Wis.; Potsdam sandstone 220, 223, 235
Ulm, Minn. wi. cn0 2 cc socniceanedescnss 200, 202
Newman, W.G 6

Noachian deluge, Fossils supposed to bethe
remains left by the ....390, 398
, Phillips on the effect of

Noerr, A

Noggerath, Jacob, on the mode of growth

of coal plants ...2.. 0.2.00 cece eect eens 400
SV RR OTAIR i pci cokceee cn cemamdaun 428, 430, 447
Nomenclature and classification of fossil
~425-431
194

Number of species of fossil plants, Evidence
furnished by the .....---.....-.. 439
reported at different dates. .. 407, 416, 417,
421, 422, 424, 428

Oak Openings :cs00 sete cers acde cose 100
Ogishkiemuncie Lake...-.....02......-.2-4 207
Oken, L., on petrified wood.. 402
Oldhamia 444
96
Olivine-diabase dcfined.............-.-.2-55 215
Oliviue-gabbro defined.... 215
Ontonagon River sandstone..........---... 235
Oqnirrh Range, Utah ......-.....-.--. «+++ 110
Orbit of particle in wave motion .....-.... 82
Oreodon beds ............0-+--008 wees “254
OVreoCyOn eosc qecpesecedescend. 2ccejesseeesa 255
Orlebar glacier, Alaska . is 352
Orohippus oaalslacisieworaeiwais Seiejais SLON!
Orthoclase-diabase chimed Jlwsmeeeeioden aes 215
Orthoclase-gabbro defined... 215
Osar or Kame, The........ 121
Osmunda ....-..-...6- 428
; supposed fossil.......-...-..... "396, 402
OWEN DD cic aise Seat leet inte cn 206
; @ source of compilation 183
Owen's Dakeccocc 2c cncacninenpeccartheenasce 314
Rive? ccetacauccencncceciensechees 315

Pacific, Divisien of the, administrative re-
POTCOF wc. acxtos Secete ore asemenes seek 47-49
Packwaukee, Wis., Potsdam sandstone..... 224
Pal PSY OPSi2..acs:sicasieemwaetanesac cede eeetes 255

Paleobotanical discovery, Historical review
OF Actorarciviniecwioreeivinissrcinttoiectdanrecisinierne eres 368
Paleobotany, Compendium of ... -- 368
, Future prospects of.......... 365

hitherto studied as distinct
from botany proper.....--.- "367
, Interdependence of botanyand 366

, List of the principal culti-
Wators Of secewsceesserexecaee 369

Need of a condensed exhibit
OL icciaioy ths eistel aerwimonaiais iste feiatarwince 364
, On the term ..... 363

464 INDEX.
Page.
Paleobotany, Pioneers in .--..-..--.-----+-- 401. | Pilularia.s.2i.0.cciccweciceceses
, Sketch of, by L. F. Ward ....357-452 | Pinitessuccinifer (amber-tree)

, The pre-scientific period of. .-.
scieutific period of....-.- 399

Paleozodlogy, Need of the term

Palladreau Islands.....-......- 231
Palmacites.... ..-....2-+------ 427
Palmer mine, Michigan........-.....--+---- 232

Papers accompanying annual report of the
Directobecees neers
Parker Creek glacier --

CARON: ..jaiste si cicjnionicicjase seteciewss

Parkinson, James; classification of fossil
Plants ics cc scosene iss 426

“Organic remains of a
: former world,”..-... 401

Parlatore, Filippo, Contributions of, to paleo-
Botany xacinesinesecemtsacanes. aceuende 415

Parsons, James, on the petrified fruits of
Sheppey ..---------.--- 397, 413

, Rational views of, on the
nature of fossils ..-..-.- 394
Pattison, 8.R; on Fossil Botany.......-..- 422
Peale, Dr. A.C........ .2.20.--e- XX, XI, 16, 28-30
Pearson, Frank M........-..---------+---- 6
Pelican Lakes ccecsivezcdsduesceaswascesescse 194
Rivet vse es sseserseeeeenee ces 194
Pelvis of Dinocerata, The.......-..-----... 300
Penokee belt............----- 193, 195, 198, 204, 207,

212, 218, 215, 218,
227, 228, 229, 230

Gap, Wisconsin .-........-.- 222, 223, 232

Gogebic -187, 192, 193, 198, 203

jron belt, The....-...-... 194-196

Perid otites...-issec ec siewiees cat sen sceweeee 217

Petrifaction, Early theories of the cause

OE sass Ra pokcemnia Senna bien Our. doe Roun weno 389, 390
Petrifying juice.............-----.-- ---+-- 390
Petrographical studies ......-.--..------+++ 209

Petzholdt, Alexander, Contributions of, to
paleohotany..

Phanogais ....
Pharerogams ........-------. -++eeee- isleies
PHU PS) Tey A wisse Seicscsnsisinteavrenisteccnsrevteeeen 221, 241
; ‘Geology of Yorkshire”.... 408
, on the geological effects of
the deluge............-... 408
Photographic work. .....-..--.-----.--+.-..XXXV¥
PHY es sg2cs,conccaeashaws vie oneece ness 428
, Objections to the term . 413
Physiotypy, Invention of......--.... 380
PHytobibNe soossieeecevewcseee cece: 426
Phytogeny, Problems of.......--..-.---.+-- 452
Phytogeography, Recent progressin....... 366
Py tothe sccenesecsuetesesients
Phytopaleontoldgy ..
Phytotypolithi ....-...-.--........
Pigeon Point, Lake Superior
River, Minnesota, graywacke....... 234

Pinus regarded by Dr. John as the amber-

MTC irs sc, sa,Seshecee ys fevc deleted “ai i/elziaisinlmiele iete'e 403
Pioneers in pateobotany....-... 401
Pipestone or Catlinite ..........- 201
Plagioclase-augite rocks ....... 215

-diallage rocks .......-..-.-.--- 215
-hypersthene rocks .....-...---. 215
Plant life of the globe, Different points of
view from which
to contemplate
the ..-........ 442, 443
, Geognostico-botan-
icalviewofthe.. 439

, Tabular exhibit of the.
Plants, Descent of .....--..--.---2.020-2-0-
, Geological periods favorable, or the
reverse, to the preservation of...450, 451

Pliny“on. fossils: ...i. s0.secc eas vewcetsecwers 386
Plot, Robert, on the nature of fossils 390
Plutonian theory of Hutton........... 398
POMCIES yo acumeeeto cst oseioesiedadcetse 427, 428
Pokegama Falls..........-...---..---- 187, 205, 206
Pokorny, A - 381
Polleys, T. A 28
POO Blinc uacy vngeesodes cameo Yee eaGee 433, 450
Polypodium, Supposed fossil ..-....--.---.. 402
Pomel, M. A.,outheJurassic floraof France. 420
Populus nigra; supposed fossil......,---..- 396
Porcupine Mountains ............ 222. -- 228, 234
Porous beds for artesian wells ............. 136

Porphyries, Felsitic, studicd microscopic-

ally
Port Arthur, Lake Superior ..
Portage Bay Island, Minnesota
Post-lacustrine deformation................

123
Potsdam sandstone, 182, 194, 196, 199, 201, 202, 220,
223, 226, 229, 234, 236, 237

Powell, Lieut. J. W., British Columbia..... 352
Maj. J. W., cited...--..2.....-020.. 150
; thickness of strata in
the several forma-
RHO Bie siseriersajeisienee see 442
, Suggested diastrophic. 118
Prairie River Falls, Minn......... 205, 225, 226, 233
Pre-scientific period of paleobotany ....... 385
Presqu? Plexi. sicdemiesisienscisseds seaeemses 217, 218
Princeton College has Wyoming fossils... 252
Pritehett, Prof. H.8...... 22... .2.... Seeiesic 12
Problems in correlation of N.W. Archean. 185
Prognostic cstimate of flow in wells........ 159
Progressive development in plant life, Lind-
ley and Hut‘on’s opposition to the doc-
GTING Of sie. aercamiseiorse. rants sieie a. ered 409
Prosser, C. 8S... 52
Protosalvinia .. 446
Psarolithes .......... 402
Pteris, supposed fossil ................2. 402
Pterophy lum :jcccseawcsumeed sees cag 447
Publications of the Survey XXXI
S80 sceek ean XXXII
Exchange of.... XXXIV
ss 195

Heuks cee aes ems 214, 215

INDEX,

Page.

Pumpelly, Prof. R., discovered glaciers on
Flathead Mountains ..........--...000- 6+ 347
Puyallup River runs from a glacier ...... . 835
Quartz fragments, Enlargements of........ 218
Quartzite series, Baraboo, The... - 198, 199

of Southern Mi rt:

465

and Southeastern Da-

kota, The .............. 199
Quartzites and sandstones studied micro-
soopically...........-..0.06-- 209
, Huronian, Genesis of........... 236
of Chippewa and Barron Coun-
ties, Wisconsin.........-.... 197
of Upper Wisconsin Valley.... 194
Quaternary ...... a tia ta reson holed 200
geology, Division of; adminis-
trative Teport 1.00.0 sdo0- ome 20-24
lakes of Great Basin studied by
G. K. Gilbert. .......--...--.- XxIL
QUIN WOrts oe 2: sicciasciceciecidceendecccamsietic 438
Quinnesec Falls, Big and Little .......-..-. 190
Rainfall cece sence ales oo soa teswleaweececuun, OAT
, Adequacy of, measured by capac-
ity of strata .... .....---2....0-- 151
Rankine, W. J. M., on wave motion ........ 80
Rash Creek Cafion moraine..............-.. 328
Raulin, Victor, Paleobotanical contributions
Of acc cates ete s pcceatadeee rene ies 421
Raumer, Carl von, on vegetable fossils eiigees 403
Recognition of ancient shores, The ........ 122
Rectification of shores........... bees este 103
Red River Valley ..-...--..---.2.--+eeee-- 199, 200
snow, Mount Shasta........-....----+- 323
Redstone, Minnesota ..-...-------+..-- 200, 228, 224
Redwood .........--. 022002 ceeeeeneeeeneee 448
Reed Wi Mi imciaiaiiacacineianisnommnaemccies 11,12
Reid, Thorburn ......-..-..sc0-ss0.---eeee 14
Renault, B., Investigations into the car-
poniferous flora of France.......-.--. ... 424

Renshawe, J. H ............--.-2000----- eee

Report of Die! Director .....-.----.-..
Reservoir or fountain head, The ....-......
Restoration of Dinocerata skeletons ..
Reutilization of water in irrigation...
Rhabdocarpus.....--.-----+--------- i
Rhin, Lucas, on the nature of fossils........
Rhizocarpe®...-..--------see---seeee
Rhizolithus .....---.-.---------------00-ee-
Rhode’s ‘‘ Pflanzenkunde der Vorwelt”....
Ribboned structure of glaciers ............
Ribs of Dinocerata.....-..--. 0200-222 005-
Ricksecker, HE. .......----202-0ceeceeeeeenee 9
Ridges of diverse origin contrasted ....... 120, 121
Ritter, Mount....-...--------eeeeeeeeenees

River terraces ......--------
Roche-4-Crier, Wisconsin .
Rocky Mountain District. ..........-

Roemer, Friedrich Adolph, Contributions
of, to paleobotany
Ropers; He Disececec. ssogeeecasenneen so ses

Page.
Rominger, C ............ccceeeccees aoe -.-191, 218
, Map of Michigan. seacnsccreenae 181
Rosinus, Michael Reinhold, on extinct spe-
OIE. s snnccummncnid lene me ecules 398
Rational views of, on the nature of
POSSIG: oss sine nesecseincsmsiens 394
R assler, E, A., Contributions of, to pa-
leGbotan ys scseiecncservaadetackeecane 413
Rove Lake .ee 2 scssueveceseossusenvese.ouse 233
Ronillier, C., Paleobotanical contributions
--- 420
Rubber packing to control flow in artesian
158
197
Russell, I.C ............. XIX, XXII, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34
, cited as to shore phenomena... 76
,on existing glaciers of the
United States ............. 308-355
Russell, Scott, cited on wave motion % 80
Rautley, F.... a. 214
Rhythmic embankments .-...........-...-- 111
Saganaga, Lake .
Sagenaria....-...
Sache T soso cess cies
Saginaw mine, Michigan.
bg i: a ee

224, 227, 231
Saint Peter’s sandstone. .-........ 182, 220, 223, 224,
235, 236, 237

Salisbury, Miss C. A., cited as to artesian
wells at Denver
, Prof. R. D

Salvinia i520 iiseetosadevcce oneness
San Bernardino County, California, arte-

sian wells 151
San Joaquin River 315
Sandalites.nisccscc scence eceesicneeeis cis 426
Sandstone from Adams County,Wisconsin. 285

Ashland County, Wis..... 235
Baraboo River ............ 236
Black Bay, Lake Superior. 234
Columbia County, Wis.... 235
Dane County, Wisconsin.. 235
Devil’s Lake 233
Enreka, Nev ......... - 235
Grant County, Wisconsin. 235
Henry Mountains, Utah... 235
Jackson County, Wis ..-. 235

Keweenaw Point, Mich . “934, 235

Marquette County, Mich.. 235
Mount Whittlesey ... 232
New Lisbon, Wis .. - + 285
Nicollet County, Minn .. 233, 235
Nipigon Bay, Lake Supe-

TOP 222isesiee seseccuecoes S84
Ontonagon River. ... 235
Porcupine Mountains .... 234
Presqu’ Isle River - 234
Saint Mary’s iver. 231
Silver Islet Landing, i. S.. 234

466 INDEX. ;
Page. Page.
Sandstone from Spurr mine ......--.....--- 232 | Selaginella arctica. .......-.-.0-+-22e-ce--ee 446
Sandstones, Quartzites and, microscopically Selden, Hi iSiicccwsciuanerserccaeesecioee sess 4
studied . -.....-..-..------- 209 | Selwyn, Dr. A. R.C......--..2-006 owectenien, 38
with crystal-faceted grains— Seminaria of Kircher........ diese Siaisiaieieimiene 390
Huronian localities........ 233 | Seneca Lake deltas 108
Potsdam localities. ......-- 223 | Sequoia .....-.-.......-.- 448
St. Peter’s localities. -.--.. 233 gigantea.........-. 448
Sandy River glacier............---------+-- 340 SOMPCTVirens......-.--.- 2.2 ee eens 448
Saporta, Marquis Gaston de, Paleobontan- Serpent River Bay...... .....-----+----+-- 188

ical studies of,in France ..--..- 424
, Rank of, as a paleobotanist ...... 368, 369
, Sketch of .....---.---24 02 eee eee eee 383

Sarayna, Torellus, Rational views of, on the
nature of fossils........--.-----+--------
Sauk County, Wisconsin, rock.

eeeeesss- 218, 214

Sauk Valley .........------..-+
Sault Ste, Marie .........-..-------25-- 2+ 188
SaGssure) wictwossseeuseecheeeea ses ea cess 219

Sauvages, L'Abbé de, on the tropical facies

of fossil plants 397
Sauveur, J., on the fossil plants of Belgium 421
Sayles, [ra wcncccciccuais se aeeriaoens veeiee XXVI, 52, 53

Saxifraga, supposed fossil -.........-..-..-- 396
Scarabelli, G20 cc-csuscsccsegeceesessaeeesi 379
Schenk, August.........- --- 869
“Sketch of -......22..2.26 382
,Paleobotanical work of... 424

Scheuchzer, Johann Jacob.. .....-.-. 369, 396, 426
, Attempt of, to refer fossil to liv-

ing plants.....-..-..-..- 896, 403, 425
; diluvian origin of fossils ...... 391
pSKOth, Of: sc: :scciienevecce 370
Schimper, Wilhelm Philip............. 369, 403, 431
, Contributions of, to paleobotany .414, 415
pS KOtCh OFS. ccsemar mareecdinsscins 375

Schists, ferrnginous of the Black River Val-
198
-of the Upper Wisconsin Valley... 194
Schlotheim, Ernst Friedrich, Baron von... 369, 40€
, Advanced views of. ...-.......- 400

» Classification of fossil plants
Dyccoeee cs eontictavowese eed 403,427

, Harly contributions of, to paleo-

botany ......-... 400, 401, 402, 404, 405
, Sketch of .. 370
Schmeltzkopf, E.-...-.2...22eee eee eee eee ee 11
Schréter, Johann Samuel, on the diluvian
ovigin of fossil remains ...-..-.-..-.. -.- 392
Schultze, Ch. Fr., indigenous theory of fos-
bil PLANS. ..2c.sectaeewewedioyy 396
, Rational views of, on the nature of
of fossils....-.....- .-----eeeees 394
, Treatment of plant impressions by 426
Schwatka, Lieut. F., on glaciers of Alaska... 353
Schweigger, A. F., on vegetable fossils ..... 403
Scientific period of paleobotany........---. 399
Scilla, Augustinus, rational views of, on the
nature of fossils ........-..2-.-.20..--ee- 393
Scouring rushes. . 433
Scratched stones.-....----..-.------.0----- 322
Sea cliffs, Origin of ............2...--..222-- 83, 84
Section to illustrate vertebrate life in Amer-
253
machete 158
Sond: theory of the origin of fossils......... “389, 390
Selaginella.2iccwsjencccessececeseecsessedecsis 438

Shaler, Prof., N.S

Shasta, Mount, Glaciers... ......-...+-.-. 329-334
Dhastna sos icceccteecie viscose ees scsews 329
Shaw, Edmund ..... 1.2.2... .s. ee eee cece ee 11,14
Sheep Rock, Great Salt Lake............--- 84
Shepard, R. D 4,14
Sherburne County, Minnesota. ...-....-.--- 200
Shore current: .cs.c-eccseces cece de cesses 85, 111
ApiEE vesniies detuned cue see nets 86, 87, 90, 98
features, Discrimination of.....-...-- 112

, Origin of the distribution of
wave-wrought .........-- 101
Shores, The recognition of ancient.... .- 122
Shore-wall .......---..--.-------- -- 109
Shumway, W. A ............--... 6,7
Shutt,G. W., Administrative report. 64-66
Sidener,- Co Bosc lcseccacccsdensclscecacecss 26
Sierra Blanca glacier..... eislslavacheinvaiedorenstslovies 344
Nevada, glaciers of.......-. 314, 327, 329-334
Sigillaria ae ~ -428, 430
Silurian, Flora of the...-...---..-. -444, 445
Silver Islet Landing, L. S., Pandatone Se eek 234

Simpson, Capt. J. H., Explorations of, in
Griat Basitiesisen. 44) hecesececceesiee eer 342
Sioux Falls, Dak......--..-2.--.2220---+-- 201
Sketch of paleobotany, L. F. Ward..-.--.- 357-452

the early history and subsequent
progress of paleobotany ...---. 385

Skull. (See Dinoceras mirabile.)

Slate belt of the Saint Louis and Missouri
Rivers, Minnesota.....-.....-..---------- 196
Sleeping Bear Bluff, Lake Michigan ........93, 108

Smith, Dr. James Edward, on the exotic
character of fossil plants ......... 402

, J. Lawrence..-..-..-0-22-. eee ewes 60
, William, on the determination of the

age of rocks by their fossils... ... 398
Sonora Pass..........-.... ieee chceciaters sieketnta a 314
Sorbus, supposed fossil.-..-...-........-2.- 396
Sorby, H.C ........-..--.. 218, 220, 221, 222, 223, 241
Sonth Atlantic District .............---...- XVII
Special study of artesian wells to be stimu-
lated <3e.cep ua cededscidasiueductcadscascae 173
Sperling, J., Theory of the origin of fossils. 390
Sphzxrococcites Scharyanus ....-.....-.... 444
‘| Sphenophyllum primevum. 445
Sphenepteng.s ccs cvkecuxe. 428
Spirangium ...-...-..2. 0.2.20. 22sec e eee eee 448
Spiritus architectonicus ................-. 390
Spit, The, formed by wave action 91-92
Split Rock Creek ..........2. 2.022.222 ee 2 200
Spontaneous generation, Doctrine of _...... 389
Sprengel, Anton, on psarolithes.......-.... 408
Da ES eee Sy hdtoas tsoeeresaawes 393
Spurr ining SOMO iiaccwendeauececereces 232
Mountain, Michigan.............-.. 222, 223

Stearns County, Minnesota...............- 200, 208

INDEX. 467
Page. Page.
Steffens, Heinrich, on petrified wood....... 402 | Tertiary flora of Australia, Important bear-

, on the mode of growth of coal

plants ....-........ aiafeecemanieaes 400
Steinhauer, Rev. Henry, Remarkable paper
of ‘On Fossil Reliquis," ete. 403
; Classification of fossil plantsby. 426
Steininger, J.,on the ‘ Pfilzisch-saur-briic-
kische Steinkohlengebirge ” - 418
SteleGhites ss :-1. < cicicciciesciaatieiss sia biiaicinieinee-enaycrele 426
Steno, Nicholaus, Rational views of, on the
nature of fossils.............-.. - 894
Sternberg, Kaspar Maria, Graf von........ 369
, Classification of fossil plants.... 428

, Harly contributions of ....402, 404, 405

; geological periods............... 428
, on the mode of growth of, coal
SARIS eee aransexeuicaweake 400
» Sketch of = 871
Stern ber gis .siscs5-.sc sce ntesejsecseocieienins 447
, Dawson's views on..........- 377, 379
Sternum, Dinocerate ...--. evanecinguiande sme 298
Stevens, General Hazard, gives account of
Mount Tachoma glacier.............--..- 339
Stigmaria ......2.02. 22.2. c eee ee eee ee 428, 430
Stikine River, glaciers of .......... ieoeneie 349, 352
Stockton, R., on map of Bonneville Lake... 95
Stone-making spirit as the cause of fossils... 390

Strabo on the meaning of fossil shells -...386, 387

Stream cliff, The -....-.....---.-.2.-.----6+ 113
work, The Delta........-......--. 104, 108
Streng, A ...-...2--.22-.220e- 197, 213, 214, 215, 216
Strong, M.; map of Wisconsin.............. 181
Structural problems in N. W. Archean .... 183
Stylinodon .......... a aeeecieseueliceemenes tos 255
Submergence, emergence, and, of shores..-. 110
Suceus Petrificus.......--..--------.------- 390
Suckow, George Adolph, Rational views of,
on fossil plants....-..---.-.--+-.--+-+6-- 395, 398
Superior, Lake, bars at head of ............. 94
Supplemental reservoirs, artesian wells .... 149
Survey of the Cascade Range .....-.-..---- xxiii
District of Columbia ........ xxiii
Syringodendron ....-..----.---------+seee-- 428
System of modern botanists.....-.--..-.+++ 435
Tabular exhibit of the plant life of the
WOOO rercutecnancoenis feces Soimnsiewecibiemeaic od 440-441
Tachoma, (see Rainier).
Tahoe Lake icccese0s esse sree sccence ss trees 314
Tallmadge, Theodore .....-..-..------++--- 6
Tchihatcheff, P. de 416
Teal Lake, Michigan, quartzite............. 232
Tehichipi Pass .......--.----+--eeee ener eee 314
Temperature of artesian-well water........ 166
Tenzel, W. E., Rational views of, on the na-
ture of fossils .....--.------ee eee e eee e eee 394
Terminology of fossil plants. (See Nomen-
clature, etc.)
Terrace by differential degradation, The.... 116
, The stream .......2-..scn0e scenes 116-118
LOUDLY sareiainrajarsiatsciemies-aursinre ediareieis 118
latidslip ....-----2ceceeeeee ees 118
wave built ......-..-.-....-.- 97
Cut .-....2.-.00-2------ 84, 85
Terraces of diverse origin.....-....-.---+-+ 115

ing of the, on the distri-

bution of plants ........

Western America ....-...

Tertullian on the significance of fossil
SHOMA s scnmseicaeduscc eevee senses es 386, 398

Tests of flow in artesian wells . 160
Teton Mountain glaciers. .- 346
Theophrastus .-.............----- 387
Thesaurus of American formations ..... XXVIII, 89
Thessalon Bay, Lake Superior............-- 230
Point :5.ci2(2/ Siemavneniseastiswesed 188
Thickness of strata in the successive geo-
logical formations.......-....... eitieteemeits 442
Thompson, Minn....
SGIDSPG cc 3 cen teecie siese
; Mount Shasta glacier.332-334
pPLOL A Heesocccmemaneed XIX, 10, 11, 12
Three Sisters (peaks) glaciers ......-...-.. 341
Thunder Bay, Lake Superior...... 182, 187, 204, 205
206, 227, 228
Cape, Lake Superior............-. 203
Thygeson, N. M ....:.-----2 ene eee eee ees 28
Tides distinguish sea-shores from lake-
10) 2). ee 71-86
overrated as shore-forming agents... 79
Tillodonts first found in Wyoming....... 250
Tillotherium .....-..-.-.-...0-+ eee 255
Time, Effect of, on flow of artesian wells... 163
measures employed in the diagrams .. 442
Tinoceras anceps 249
grande 251
lucare 251
Todd County, Minnesota . 208
POS: J. Bi saseecstics oem ceive XXI, 21, 22
Topographic features of lake shores, The .-. 69
WOEK ocscdeccueseereteesacess RVIT
Térnebohn, A. E ......-....--------- eee eee 214
Toroweap Valley, Grand Cafion of the Colo-

TACO af ce ,ccisinicie a prcsinidiavracy-Tiaewe Setua eeees 113
Torpedoes used to increase water-flow..-... 154
Tournefort’s system, Scheuchzer’s attempt

to classify fossil plants under....... 396, 425, 426
TOWSON: Ry Mocs. sshascuene bese separ
Transportation, Littoral .

Trenton limestone...-...--.-.-.---------+6-

Trifolium, Supposed fossil.........-.-.....- 396
Trigonocarpus 447
Trinidad, Sandstone from ...-.. ..-..------ 219
Tuolumne Cafion .....-...----.-..2.0.-24. 316, 317

Parmer; WHikl.ccecidscnecisiscwaateccaicsaesiimnaie
Tyler's Fork, Quartzite from
Types of vegetation........---..------.-++-

Tyndall, John; an authority on glaciers .309,310,320

Unalaska, Glaciers in............. 358
Unger, Franz, Classification of fossil plants. 422
, Contributions of, to paleobotany ..414, 415,

417, 419, 420, 422

, Rank of, as a paleobotanist

, Sketch of............- - 875
Ungulata ...... 255
Uinta group... .-- se. ee ence ee eneeen cece ene 252

468 INDEX.
Page. Page.
Vinta Mountains ..........--20-2-.0-eeee ee 249 | Wasatch Mountains........--...22222ceneee 249
Uintatherium ......-.----- 22. eseee cence ee 251 ; fault scarp at Farming-
Undertow at head of bay........--..------- 98 ton, Utah..........-. 114
, Detritus sorted by .-.......-.--. 86-98 | Water, Character of, in artesian wells...... 166
, Function of ...... Jeoteewoe ee ses 81,82 | Wausat..-...- 220.222 ee eee ee eee eee 194, 214
Union Peak, Nevada .......-----2.22++-+-+- 342 | Wauswaugoning Bay, Lake Superior ...... 233

Upham, Warren, Minnesota Geological sur-

VEY nak dcoweake comers tenon emeaee 183, 197
Upheaval causes irregularity of erosion... 15
Uralitic diabase defined..........-.-------- 215

gabbro defined.......-.....-..----- 215
Van Hise, Prof.C.K-.... 24, 25, 27, 28, 188, 194, 196,
197, 202, 209, 213, 214, 215, 216, 237-240

Hoesen, Henry I.....-...-.-.-.-------- 34
Vancouver cited on Alaskan glaciers ....-.
Vanuxem's Geology of New York ...-. .-.

Variolaria
Varnum, R. T
Vascular cryptogams .-.
6
-terraces
Vegetable paleontology -.....-.-... ....-- 363
Vermilion Creek deposit .... .-...----.---. 252
. 193, 197, 205, 208, 210
dsisetineeces: 206
Vertebre of dinocerata, The.............. 294-298
Vertebrate life in America, Section to illus-
trate .....--.- 253
paleontology . -- 363
Virtus formativa... .........202...-2---5-- 389
Vis lapidifica, Theory of .......-.... -... 389,390
Vitis, Supposed fossil .....-. ............- 396
Voigt, Johann Karl Wilhelm, on sand-
Bae os 219
on the Pearolithes of the Museum
Lenzianum ... .. ...--..-.-. ---- 402
Volkmann, G. A., Names given to fossil.
plants by..... ...-... 426
; degeneration of plants ........ 397
; diluvian originoffussilremains. 392
; indigenous theory of fossil
plants . 396
Volkmannia.....-..---.-----2----- ees eeeeee 430
Wade, Melvin S ............-..-eeeeeeeeeee 50
Wadsworth, M.E ................ 191, 193, 213, 214,
216, 217, 218, 220
Wakefield, G. F.......------..---eaceee--e- 6
Walch, J, E. Immanuel.......-...--.-..... 400
; diluvian origin of fossil remains... 392
; exotic theory of fussil plants -.... 397
; extinct Calamitay .......--......... 398
; indigenous theory of fossil plants... 396
; nomenclature and classification of
fossil plants 403, 426
Walcott, Charles D.-..-... XXVI, 19
; administrative report . 52,55
Walled lakes........---- 22. .-0-- seer eeeeee 109
Walling, Prof. H. F ...-..... ...... XVI, 8, 4,7, 8
Ward, Lester F ..............0000-2 0-005 XXVI, 50

; administrative report ....

; Sketch of paleobotany ...357-452

gp OSDOLNG 3 22 se5;5-7 wiasdiciecloinie Sess aeiereyerevejerd 57
Wasatch deposits

Wave-built terrace, The
-cut terrace, The.....
motion, Theory of
-work on shores...-...---2. -- --s65

OF ii eintasate ctavars ninvarciteiptamialaialeniaise eneasiet 101
Wedel, G. W., Rational views of, on the na-
tare:Of fossils: se jccise ces weses. seeeieciree 394
Weed, Walter H........-.....2..0------00- 15,18
Wells. (See Artesian.)
Weppen, J. A., on petrified wood from India
and Siberia. sccceccscdcecescegsas veecee< 402
Werner, W. G.; Neptunian theory......... 398

Westfield; Wid: s-.20--- 0s cceesecceceeeces
Wheeler, Liens. G. M-...-
Wheeler's Peak....-.-.-. 20.2... cece eee ee ee

; administrative report.... 50,51

, cited on artesian wells... 149
, explained shore wall... .. 109
; map of Iowa........--.-. 181
ROW AG esis einclercctecitaccieerente 342
River glacier . 336, 337, 338, 339
rans from a glacier. - - 835, 337
Whitney glacier...........-..2---e eee ee eee 334
Prof. J. D.; on California glaciers. 326
; Mount Shasta gla-
ciers...--...0..---- 332
, red snow on Mount
Shasta ..-.......... 323
Whittlesey, Mount.............00..0002.04. 232

Wichman, A....----...-.....-.0--
Williams, A. jr .-.

; administrative report .... 63, 64
PLOl, Ws Sic creweeeuscnece XXVI, 52, 54
369

Williamson, W.C ....-- 202.0222. 2 ee eee ee
, Contributions of, to paleobot-

ANY isc neces owes

, Sketch of

Wilson, H. M..........-. -.22..
Sd...
Winchell, Prof. N. H. ..26, 192, 202, 206, 207, 208, 225

, on equivalence of slates .....-.. 196
; map of Minnesota.............-. 181
; report cited 183
Wind River glaciers. ... 344
mountains... 249
Wintun glacier..........-..2.20..-..2.22006 333,
Wisconsin River -.....-....2....22-..-000. 198, 217
Valley osceccccesce 211, 213, 214, 216, 228

; Upper, Schists and quart-
BULEB Of scnk sc ceenanowins 194
Witham, Henry T. M...........---........ 369, 374
, Contributions of, to paleobotany.. 411
go Keteli Of seencmeees: wae sectccnn: 372
Wood County, Wisconsin ...-.....2........ 217
, Prof. A.,gaveaccountofMount Hood 339

Woodward, Dr. John, on the effects of the
BUD ds eeccuasuernun Wee au eames a wmune

INDEX. 469
Page. Page.
Wooster, L. O.....cccnecennnncceeees dene XXvI, 53 | Yale College museum; Wyoming fossils... 251
Worring and Auer's invention of physio- 252, 255, 261, 265, 276
PY DY io sss isc caasncwee: venes scicecicesmncdie 880 | Yeates, C.M .......-ecscecee
‘Wright, George M ..... .-15, 214, 215, 331 | Yellowstone National Park survey
Wyoming Division, The............-..-.+-- 10 | Young, A. A., describes a sandstone
Eocene lake basin. sedvandsiss: 249 | Yuccites ......2....0--scncennscneesen
Zamia angustifolia
Kanthus -...... ccc cccennccennsenccncncnene’ 886 | Zenker, Jonathan Carl, Contributions of, to
Xenophanes on the significance of fossil paleobotany. ....-.sscsenens ccnncsceneeens 411
shellg ....cc0020 886, 898 | Zirkel. 219 220

=)

to ——

ne